LVM in default filesystem layout

[Ray Strode]

Hi,

> That is true, but it's beside the point.
You're right that it's beside the point, but it's an additional, related, point worth discussing.

> Throwing out device mapper just because LVM is built on top of it seems pretty silly.
Hang on, current defaults:

1) LVM
2) No encryption

This thread started with proposing changing 1.  If we do that without changing 2, then we won't
want to use device mapper by default anymore. I'm sure you agree with that statement, and don't
think it's silly. I'm not saying throwing device mapper out because LVM is built on it, I'm saying
device mapper is a means to an end. If that end is no longer an end goal for us then we can get
rid of device mapper.

If we also want to change 2) no encryption, then there's the question of how to get there and that's
another discussion worth having.  maybe device mapper is the answer, and maybe that's okay.  I'm
just saying device mapper is extra complexity and if we can get rid of it, great.

Of course, I'd rather btrfs was ready, but I guess that's not a possibility near-term or mid-term.

> You guys are sure excited to dump something that is proven to work
> (and allows flexibility in the filesystem on top of it) for something
> new and shiny
It doesn't have a perfect track record... In the past it's broken journaling and TRIM.

--Ray