4 ms·

if you count XFS as “that other fs”, then no, it can't

• aidenn0 9y ago
  Other FSs can shrink partitions without losing data; ZFS can't. The fact that XFS can't doesn't make my statement false.
  • feld 9y ago
    Other filesystems will lose your data or write corrupted data
    • rbanffy 9y ago
      APFS and BtrFS at least won't.
      • feld 9y ago
        APFS doesn't checksum the data. You've been deceived. BTRFS still cannot be trusted for various reasons. It was deprecated as of RHEL 7.4
        • tavert 9y ago
          What reasons? openSUSE is defaulting to btrfs. snapper is really sweet.
          • cpuguy83 9y ago
            Because RHEL kernels are very old and the maintenance burden of backporting btrfs changes is too great (and fragile).
            • tavert 9y ago
              That sounds like a problem with RHEL, not a problem with btrfs
              • rbanffy 9y ago
                For the end user it's a problem with the ecosystem. Red Hat needs to keep the kernel patched for a very long time and some pieces move way too fast.
              • cpuguy83 9y ago
                Right, it's not a btrfs problem other than btrfs is moving too quickly and RHEL's kernel stands still (by design).
        • vetinari 9y ago
          Being deprecated in RHEL means nothing; Red Hat didn't have any btrfs people anyway. They have all the xfs people, so that's what they focus on.
      • ThatPlayer 9y ago
        As long as you don't use Btrfs's RAID 5/6 features. I happened to be more lucky and my filesystem only locked up read-only on me, and I had to transfer everything off.