[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <843433D5F73C864182AC91B8@nimrod.local>
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2011 09:18:46 +0100
From: Alex Bligh <alex@...x.org.uk>
To: Joe Thornber <thornber@...hat.com>,
"Amir G." <amir73il@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc: Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
tytso@....edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvm-devel@...hat.com,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alex Bligh <alex@...x.org.uk>
Subject: Re: LVM vs. Ext4 snapshots (was: [PATCH v1 00/30] Ext4 snapshots)
--On 11 June 2011 08:49:08 +0100 Joe Thornber <thornber@...hat.com> wrote:
> I am also convinced multisnap wont be suitable for every use case.
I'm surprised by one thing ext 4 snapshots doesn't seem to do: I would have
thought the "killer feature" for doing snapshots in the fs rather than in
the block layer would be the ability to snapshot - and more importantly
roll back - only parts of the directory hierarchy.
(I've only read the URLs Amir sent, so apologies if I've missed this)
--
Alex Bligh
--
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