From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Louis-David Mitterrand Subject: Re: status of raid 4/5 disk reduce Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:52:52 +0100 Message-ID: <20081211135252.GA23891@apartia.fr> References: <493D8A95.2020700@mikebrancato.com> <493EDF02.5090500@redwax.co.uk> <20081209215149.GA21523@cthulhu.home.robinhill.me.uk> <7d86ddb90812091515m1e0ee2f9w95a86ca2b56a98fe@mail.gmail.com> <493FB2AC.7000902@redwax.co.uk> <494059A4.8050702@mikebrancato.com> <4940B44F.9000000@mikebrancato.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4940B44F.9000000@mikebrancato.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 01:33:51AM -0500, Michael Brancato wrote: > > David Lethe wrote: > >> Respectfully, go bother the LVM, jfs, ext, afs, and all the other >> file >> system people. You have zero chance of getting them on board to support >> online file system shrinking without any guarantee of scratch space. >> My advice is that you don't tell them you also want them to resize while >> the md volume is being resized, and also don't tell them that the array >> might be degraded. > > I didn't bring up nor argued the filesystem online resize issue, you > did. Why does the filesystem have to be online during the reshape or > the shrink? People shrink filesystems and partitions while offline > everyday, and the sun still rises. Filesystem support for reshaping > (not resizing) should be a non-issue. Resizing shrink exists today. Not for xfs. -- http://www.critikart.net