Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 117

Thread: Btrfs? Why??

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On 2014-09-30 02:36, jonte1 wrote:
    > For those that not read German google translate may do it.


    Ha! It is close to unintelligible.

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On 2014-09-29 20:46, jonte1 wrote:
    >
    > I t took me 23 tries (no this is not a joke) in Factory 13.2 to try to
    > install in my old 12 years old PC 32-bit I586. Brtfs /. XFS /home. Oh
    > yes we had fun home here. Later Beta1 13.2.


    I hope you report that in Bugzilla...


    (13.1-32 was broken on release, and took months to solve (crash after
    first hibernation) - guess nobody tested 32 bit and reported back)


    > Who will understand the setup screens of Brtfs?
    >
    > [image: http://www.jodo.nu/pic/pic2/c.jpg]


    I do just understand the idea, not the details to myself decide change
    the settings. Just accept the proposal.

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,674
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On Tue 30 Sep 2014 12:36:01 AM CDT, jonte1 wrote:


    As usual.. systemd is a part.. Problem. SLED/SLES 13Xn are causing
    problems in openSUSE 13.1 and upcomming 13.2 whit he btrfs as default
    choice.

    http://tinyurl.com/nwc7ed5

    For those that not read German google translate may do it.

    regards


    Hi
    What has systemd got to do with the btrfs filesystem? SLE 13anything is
    at least six plus years away, how can that be affecting openSUSE
    13.1/13.2?

    So, just like the default desktop, you can change it, you have the
    choice.....? Rock on systemd, uefi, btrfs and GNOME....

    --
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.11.10-21-desktop
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!


  4. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On 2014-09-30 05:47, malcolmlewis wrote:

    > Hi
    > What has systemd got to do with the btrfs filesystem?


    It does, somewhat. The systemd devs want to do certain things that need
    btrfs. I can not name which, this moment, sorry. Headache...

    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,674
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On Tue 30 Sep 2014 04:13:06 AM CDT, Carlos E. R. wrote:

    On 2014-09-30 05:47, malcolmlewis wrote:

    > Hi
    > What has systemd got to do with the btrfs filesystem?


    It does, somewhat. The systemd devs want to do certain things that need
    btrfs. I can not name which, this moment, sorry. Headache...

    Hi
    btrfs has been around awhile (seven years or so..), just like uefi...
    application A wants to take advantage of application B, I would
    consider that progress/evolution...


    --
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.11.10-21-desktop
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!


  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,015

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    Ahumm.., -haven’t you folk figured out that if I can blame something on systemd I will! I think in many cases that I'm able to come up with a connection there even if not others thinks so .

    No I have not report to bugzilla, why not? I had a look on the new interface and try to do some searches if anyone else had simular.. I gave up. Headache. Week excuse there I know. Will try to do closest days. How I know it was 23times? Post-it (yellow one with glue) noted on sins start to trying install factory 13.2 snapshots and btrfs.
    -Is not the i586 plattform obsolete by now some one may say? I dont think so.

    Anyway over to something else in connection to btrfs, I was thinking that I was to have to do a LT-observation on this with btrfs that should be default in 13.1 and I felt unsure about it. I started a pre 13.1_64 (today a standard 13.1, no extras) VM in Virtualbox on 12 October 2013. I set it up with a max 25GB HD (dynamic up to this) on my server in the basement. I was to start the VM now and then and some times do updates when notified.

    The file created when installed, Opensuselatest.vdi was 14.2GB(btrfs on / and /home) after additional sw was added. 4 Days later (16 October) I started it up and I could see that a subdirectory was created in VirtualBox/opensuselatest/ called snapshots.

    Here it was happening things. Started up snapper today and notice ID 1-164 (12 October 2013 -2 October 2014 (after updates)) the orginal file is still where it should be(Opensuselatest.vdi 14.2GB). In directory /Opensuselatest/snapshots I have 3 files (one *.sav 590.3MB) (one xxx.vdi 17.5GB) and (one xxx2.vdi 4.6GB).

    I did an zypper dup today and all this 3 files was groving 3,5GB in total compared with before the zypper dup (snapper says latest change was 23 September 2014 before this one).

    Some numbers then on HD occupied:
    -original file size 14.2GB (dynamic HD size in max25GB)
    -file size in snapshots directory 22.7GB
    Not bad, a total of 36.9GB. Anyone care to calculate % (joking a bit)? What happening to my original setup that a maxium of 25GB was allowed/set? Did I ask for snapshots? I have look upon some of the tools and feel very unsure to try use them. Oh yes, why not delete the whole snapshots directory in the file manager (I tested beause I can guess that someone will try this sooner or later, -result=good that I have bckup of my VM's ).

    Connection to systemd in this post? Have the same problem as btrfs, something that some people has implemented and it gives additional value for some but not have been able to keep up with easy tools to manage for a ordinary user.

    Longer post then I was planning, -lol or shout at me.

    regards
    I'm shameless like others in the forum -was I to any help or made sense? If yes: click the on the star below to the left. Written whit a ;-) in my eye.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    2,004

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    You can disable snapshots during the 13.2 install now and just uninstall Snapper and there you go. No snapshots, no excessive disk usage.

    On that note I don't even know why anyone in their right mind would use XFS for _anything_. It's proven to be so unstable it's scary - heck it has failed for me more often than btrfs.
    .: miuku #suse @ irc.freenode.net
    :: miuku@opensuse.org

    .: h​ttps://download.opensuse.org/repositories/home:/Miuku/

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Podunk
    Posts
    26,674
    Blog Entries
    15

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On Thu 02 Oct 2014 11:06:01 AM CDT, jonte1 wrote:

    Some numbers then on HD occupied:
    -original file size 14.2GB (dynamic HD size in max25GB)
    -file size in snapshots directory 22.7GB
    Not bad, a total of 36.9GB. Anyone care to calculate % (joking a bit)?
    What happening to my original setup that a maxium of 25GB was
    allowed/set? Did I ask for snapshots? I have look upon some of the tools
    and feel very unsure to try use them. Oh yes, why not delete the whole
    snapshots directory in the file manager (I tested beause I can guess
    that someone will try this sooner or later, -result=good that I have
    bckup of my VM's ).
    Hi
    How are you looking at disk usage, have you used the btrfs tools?

    Again, adjust the snapper configuration, learn up about the filesystem
    and tools to get the best comprimize. I can help you there, it's your
    system.

    --
    Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890)
    openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.11.10-21-desktop
    If you find this post helpful and are logged into the web interface,
    please show your appreciation and click on the star below... Thanks!


  9. #29

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    Quote Originally Posted by malcolmlewis View Post
    adjust the snapper configuration, learn up about the filesystem
    and tools to get the best comprimize.
    Is openSuse meant to be used by system administrators only?

    Or is it also meant to be a viable alternative for (non-techy) normal desktop users?
    In that case, do not set the default filesystem to Btrfs in the openSuse installer.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    25,547

    Default Re: Btrfs? Why??

    On 2014-10-02 13:06, jonte1 wrote:

    > Anyway over to something else in connection to btrfs, I was thinking
    > that I was to have to do a LT-observation on this with btrfs that should
    > be default in 13.1 and I felt unsure about it. I started a pre 13.1_64
    > (today a standard 13.1, no extras) VM in Virtualbox on 12 October 2013.
    > I set it up with a max 25GB HD (dynamic up to this) on my server in the
    > basement. I was to start the VM now and then and some times do updates
    > when notified.
    >
    > The file created when installed, Opensuselatest.vdi was 14.2GB(btrfs
    > on / and /home) after additional sw was added. 4 Days later (16
    > October) I started it up and I could see that a subdirectory was created
    > in VirtualBox/opensuselatest/ called snapshots.


    ....

    > Not bad, a total of 36.9GB. Anyone care to calculate % (joking a bit)?


    I think that you may be confusing Virtualbox snapshots (host machine)
    with btrfs snapshots (guest machine).


    On the other hand, a btrfs filesystem increasing size with updates is an
    intentional feature, a good thing: the idea is that after the
    update/upgrade you can backout to the previous state, or consolidate it.

    This new wonderful feature needs resources, of course :-)
    If you don't have those resources, disable the feature.


    > Connection to systemd in this post? Have the same problem as btrfs,
    > something that some people has implemented and it gives additional value
    > for some but not have been able to keep up with easy tools to manage for
    > a ordinary user.


    That's true.


    --
    Cheers / Saludos,

    Carlos E. R.
    (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •