[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52699.1307746288@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 18:51:28 -0400
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To: "Amir G." <amir73il@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
Yongqiang Yang <xiaoqiangnk@...il.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sandeen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/30] Ext4 snapshots
On Thu, 09 Jun 2011 13:54:13 +0300, "Amir G." said:
> Why do you keep saying 'backup only'?
> There is a huge difference between having long lived snapshots,
> like CTERA products have, and temporary snapshot for backup
> purpose (for which LVM is adequate).
I must have blinked somewhere - I'm not convinced LVM is even "adequate" for
backup purposes. In particular, how does an LVM-level snapshot deal with the
"metadata in memory" problem (basically the exact same problem as running fsck
on a disk partition that is already mounted)?
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists