Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs’s snapshotting is simple to use and understand. The snapshots will show up as normal directories under the snapshotted directory, and you can cd into it and walk around like in a normal directory. By default, all snapshots are writeable in Btrfs, but you can create read-only snapshots if you so choose. Read-only snapshots are great if you are just going to take a snapshot for a backup and then delete it once the backup completes. Writeable snapshots are handy because you can do things such as snapshot your file system before performing a system update; if the update breaks your system, you can reboot into the snapshot and use it like your normal file system."
Posted Feb 9, 2012 17:48 UTC (Thu)
by Lumag (subscriber, #22579)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Feb 9, 2012 18:21 UTC (Thu)
by patrick_g (subscriber, #44470)
[Link] (2 responses)
Posted Feb 9, 2012 18:57 UTC (Thu)
by PO8 (guest, #41661)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 9, 2012 19:34 UTC (Thu)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link]
Posted Feb 10, 2012 12:38 UTC (Fri)
by pbaum (subscriber, #4514)
[Link] (5 responses)
Peter
Posted Feb 10, 2012 13:48 UTC (Fri)
by khim (subscriber, #9252)
[Link] (2 responses)
I doubt it. It'll require huge amount of useless (for other purposes) information to be kept around. Snapshot is basically just a directory COWed to other place. It can share it's content with any number of other directories and btrfs neither knows nor cares about that.
Posted Feb 10, 2012 14:22 UTC (Fri)
by dwmw2 (subscriber, #2063)
[Link] (1 responses)
You can easily find parts (subdirs, etc.) of a snapshot which you can see are still identical because they are using the same storage. That saves you from having to do a brute-force comparison of the whole of the file system's contents with a backup.
But no, I don't believe this is implemented yet even though it's theoretically possible.
Posted Feb 10, 2012 17:03 UTC (Fri)
by nybble41 (subscriber, #55106)
[Link]
Not only that, but it should be possible to use the back-references to determine specifically _which_ files from the older snapshot share storage with the file you're examining, meaning that you could (in theory) efficiently track renames and copies across the entire filesystem without comparing every file against every other file.
Posted Feb 11, 2012 17:04 UTC (Sat)
by bluss (guest, #47454)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 11, 2012 19:29 UTC (Sat)
by pbaum (subscriber, #4514)
[Link]
Many thanks.
Peter
Posted Feb 17, 2012 19:14 UTC (Fri)
by Yenya (subscriber, #52846)
[Link] (3 responses)
Posted Feb 17, 2012 19:31 UTC (Fri)
by dlang (guest, #313)
[Link] (2 responses)
https://www.usenix.org/publications/login/february-2012/b...
you may want to e-mail the author, in the past I've had cases where I wanted to discuss an article more publicly and the Author asked usenix to make the article available for free.
Posted Feb 17, 2012 19:58 UTC (Fri)
by Yenya (subscriber, #52846)
[Link] (1 responses)
Posted Feb 24, 2012 0:23 UTC (Fri)
by geek (guest, #45074)
[Link]
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
No, it wouldn't require extra information. When you make a snapshot, nothing is actually copied. You just end up with two pointers to the same tree. As either or both of them change, that's when the COW kicks in and new data are written out elsewhere as the trees diverge.
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)
Btrfs: The Swiss army knife of storage (;login:)