From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261825AbTF2TCR (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2003 15:02:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262095AbTF2TCQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2003 15:02:16 -0400 Received: from mail.jlokier.co.uk ([81.29.64.88]:21128 "EHLO mail.jlokier.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261825AbTF2TCP (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Jun 2003 15:02:15 -0400 Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 20:16:27 +0100 From: Jamie Lokier To: John Bradford Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mlmoser@comcast.net Subject: Re: File System conversion -- ideas Message-ID: <20030629191627.GA26258@mail.jlokier.co.uk> References: <200306291613.h5TGDerX001001@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200306291613.h5TGDerX001001@81-2-122-30.bradfords.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org John Bradford wrote: > > which is awfully difficult if you have, say, a 60GB filesystem, a 60GB > > disk, and nothing else. > > Well, I don't partition all of the space on every new disk I buy > straight away, I partition off what I think I'll need, and leave the > rest unallocated. I used to do something like that. It became awfully inconvenient, so I... > > > that the only reason to do it would be if you > > > could do it on a read-write filesystem without unmounting it. > > > > IMHO even if it requires the filesystem to be unmounted, it would > > still be useful. More challenging to use - you'd have to boot and run > > from ramdisk, but much more useful than not being able to convert at all. > > Only if it is the root filesystem, the filesystem of which generally > isn't going to affect overall performance that much. ...now use a single "/" filesystem on most systems, with a tiny "/boot" one to ensure booting. With journalling, this risk of losing data this way is much lower than it used to be, and the old reason for using multiple partitions - to avoid having to fsck /usr - no longer applies. > > But useless unless you have a second disk lying around that you don't > > use for anything but filesystem conversions. > > Not at all. You can just use unpartitioned space on your existing > disk. So you have as much space unpartitioned on your disks as you are actually using to store data? I generally don't. -- Jamie