default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Nathanael Noblet]

On 03/01/2014 02:18 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2014, at 1:19 PM, Jon <jdisnard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The inability to shrink or reduce XFS is rather disappointing. I've
>> seen a few sarcastic remarks along the lines of (paraphrased): why
>> would anyone ever want to shrink a volume?
> In the context of server, and default installs, why is a valid question.
>
>
>> People do shrink volumes, and this lack of flexibility is an important
>> consideration I feel was ignored in the Server WG decision.
> What is the use case for volume shrinking in a server context? Dual boot is a total edge case for servers.
Recently I had a client who required that some data be on an encrypted 
partition. The servers were rented from a datacenter instead of being 
cloud based etc. As such you don't have access to the kickstart used to 
initialize and install the OS. So we had to shrink the rootfs to make 
room for a new lvm partition for the data. I've had to do that a handful 
of times for various reasons but the above is the most recent.

-- 
Nathanael