On Wed, 2024-04-10 at 11:22 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 10:54 AM Tadej Janež <tadej.j@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2024-04-09 at 10:00 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 9:53 AM Tadej Janež <tadej.j@xxxxxx> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey Fedora Cloud WG! > > > > > > > > Firstly, thanks for providing Fedora for the popular cloud > > > > providers! > > > > > > > > Since Fedora 35, the Fedora Cloud images use btrfs by default > > > > [1]. > > > > For my deployments, I would like to use ext4 or xfs, so my > > > > question > > > > are: > > > > 1) Is it possible to change the root file system at deploy > > > > time? > > > > 2) If not, how could one change the cloud images to use a > > > > different > > > > root file system? > > > > > > > > > > It is not possible to change at deployment time, you would need > > > to > > > build your own custom images. > > > > > > > Ok, thanks for clarifying! > > > > > Our images are now defined here: > > > https://pagure.io/fedora-kiwi-descriptions/blob/rawhide/f/teams/cloud/cloud.xml > > > > > > If you want to use something else, you'd want to have your own > > > version > > > of the definitions and modify that file to use the filesystem of > > > your > > > choice. > > > > I see, one would need to modify the "filesystem" key of the > > selected > > Cloud-Base-<provider> image. > > > > Are there instructions on how to build a custom cloud image? > > > > The repository README includes a quickstart section for building your > own images. > > > However, even if I can easily build a custom cloud image, the > > overhead > > of maintaining custom cloud images is very high. > > > > For every Fedora release and cloud provider, I would need to build > > the > > image and then with IaC (e.g. Terraform), handle uploading the > > custom > > image and using it... > > > > Yeah, it is more overhead, for sure. > Thinking out loud... the modification in my case would not be a custom tailored image for my use case but more similar to how Fedora project builds different spins if people want to use a non-GNOME desktop environment or ALT images for people using alternative architectures. Is there a possibility to reuse the existing image building infrastructure and add tasks for building images with e.g. ext4 as the rootfs? > > > > > > Is there a particular reason you want to use ext4 or xfs for your > > > rootfs? Typically the pattern we see is that people attach a > > > secondary > > > volume or use S3 and put their data on that instead of the > > > rootfs. > > > > > > > Yes, I use that pattern as well. Usually, /srv or /var would be on > > a > > separate block storage and formatted with the file system of > > choice. > > > > The reasons why I would want to use, e.g. ext4 for the rootfs, > > would > > be: > > > > 1. Familiarity. I've mainly been using ext4 or LVM+ext4 (with LUKS > > underneath) for the last 2 decades. I know the tools and I know > > what > > "care" such filesystems need. > > > > 2. Maturity. Ext2/3/4 have been round for quite longer than btrfs > > and > > there are very little "unknowns" or "surprises" with it. > > > > 3. Simplicity. When provisioning machines with a cloud provider, I > > actually don't need the LVM+ext4 combination because the cloud > > provider > > would typically handle the things LVM would handle for a non-cloud > > machine, e.g. increasing the block storage size, snapshotting, ... > > > > Please, don't read this as a critique against btrfs, just me trying > > to > > explain why I would find it nicer to just use ext4 for the rootfs > > as > > well. > > > > That's totally fair. I will point out that one of the big reasons we > use Btrfs is actually to enable space efficiency (which can lead to > cost savings across the board). The used storage is roughly 40% less > than on ext4 due to leveraging both transparent compression and > reflinks. > > The other reason is to make it easy to do replication for backups and > other purposes. > > You may also find it to be beneficial for easily avoiding certain > kinds of failure cases that can happen on ext4 (such as inode > exhaustion with containers), since btrfs dynamically allocates inodes > per subvolume. > > You can also grow (and shrink!) the volume live while the system is > mounted and online safely. > Thanks for enumerating these benefits. And I agree that these benefits alone justify the reason for switching to btrfs by default. I might be tempted to check out the btrfs status page again and start playing with it. -- _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list -- cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to cloud-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
