| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 06:52:20 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> To: "Amir G." <amir73il@...rs.sourceforge.net> Cc: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sandeen@...hat.com Subject: Re: LVM vs. Ext4 snapshots (was: [PATCH v1 00/30] Ext4 snapshots) On Wed, Jun 08, 2011 at 09:26:11PM +0300, Amir G. wrote: > In my old next3.sf.net wiki, which I do update from time to time, > I listed 4 advantages of Ext4 (then next3) snapshots over LVM: > * Performance: only small overhead to write performance with snapshots > * Scalability: no extra overhead per snapshot > * Maintenance: no need to pre-allocate disk space for snapshots > * Persistence: snapshots don't vanish when disk is full > > As far as I know, the only thing that has changed from dm-snap > to dm-multisnap is the Scalability. I don't think you have looked at dm-multisnap at all, have you? It addresses all your points and many more. Take a look at the code which is in the multisnap branch of https://github.com/jthornber/linux-2.6/, there's also some slides on it from Linuxtag at: https://github.com/jthornber/storage-papers/blob/master/thinp-snapshots-2011/thinp-and-multisnap.otp?raw=true -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists