[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dbe56ac2-22bd-74d5-ab5d-9f6673884212@fastmail.fm>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2021 15:06:45 +0200
From: Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@...tmail.fm>
To: Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bcachefs - snapshots
On 9/27/21 3:49 AM, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> Snapshots have been merged! 9 months of work and 3k lines of new code, finally
> released. Some highlights:
>
> - btrfs style subvolumes & snapshots interface
> - snapshots are writeable
> - highly scalable: number of snapshots is limited only by your disk space
> - highly space efficient: no internal fragmentation issues
>
> Design doc here: https://bcachefs.org/Snapshots/
>
> The core functionality is complete - snapshot creation and deletion works, fsck
> changes are done (most of the complexity was in making fsck work without
> O(number of snapshots) performance - tricky). Everything else is a todo item:
>
> - still need to export different st_dev for files in different subvolumes
> (we'll never allocate a new inode with an inode number that collides with an
> inode inother subvolume - but snapshots will naturally result in colliding
> inode numbers)
With my limited high level view on it - shouldn't you discuss with Neil
about a solution and to avoid going the btrfs route for colliding inode
numbers?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists