On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 19:19:37 +0200, dexen deVries wrote: > On Wednesday 06 July 2011 18:05:29 you wrote: > > Just one more thing. > > > > For btrfs and other file systems, it is customary to have a separate boot > > partition, so that at a minimum, you have 3 partitions - /boot, Swap, and > > /. Would that be a problem for nilfs2? > > > > If it is ok to have a separate boot partition, does it make sense to use > > nilfs2 on it? Or is it better to use a non-journaling file system, like > > Linux Native (ext2) on the boot partition, and nilfs2 on /. > > > for reference, my setup at home and at work: > two harddrives, one for / and /boot, the other for /home. > > both / and /home are NILFS2, while /boot is ext3. > > i wanted a very reliable journaling FS on /boot to lessen risk of > foobar, As dexen mentioned, separating boot partition is more reliable. And I think ext3 is a good choice for it. This configuration is recommended especially if you make a dual boot environment. On the other hand, incorporating /boot into / is not bad choice if grub2 and initramfs-tools are properly set up and used. This configuration is simple and allows us to back up a fully consistent state of the system (with a snapshot). > and also I'm using lilo, which is not supported by NILFS2 yet -- > lack of fibmap syscall. This topic was once discussed with the title of "FIBMAP ioctl missing". fibmap internally uses bmap vfs method. Adding the feature is not so difficult, but it must not be used for overwriting data blocks because nilfs everytime changes allocation of file blocks due to its COW nature. Garbage collection also blows up safety of such operation. Unfortunately, swap file is actually doing it. Does LILO use fibmap for read-only purpose ? If so, we only need a method to deny direct block write by the swap file. Regards, Ryusuke Konishi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nilfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
