Hi, > On Mar 27, 2017, at 4:17 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn <ahferro...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > One other thing that I just thought of: > For a backup system, assuming some reasonable thinning system is used for the > backups, I would personally migrate things slowly over time by putting new > backups on the new filesystem, and shrinking the old filesystem as the old > backups there get cleaned out. Unfortunately, most backup software I've seen > doesn't handle this well, so it's not all that easy to do, but it does save > you from having to migrate data off of the old filesystem, and means you > don't have to worry as much about the resize of the old FS taking forever.
Right. This is an option we can do from a software perspective (our own solution - https://bitbucket.org/flyingcircus/backy) but our systems in use can’t hold all the data twice. Even though we’re migrating to a backend implementation that uses less data than before I have to perform an “inplace” migration in some way. This is VM block device backup. So basically we migrate one VM with all its previous data and that works quite fine with a little headroom. However, migrating all VMs to a new “full” backup and then wait for the old to shrink would only work if we had a completely empty backup server in place, which we don’t. Also: the idea of migrating on btrfs also has its downside - the performance of “mkdir” and “fsync” is abysmal at the moment. I’m waiting for the current shrinking job to finish but this is likely limited to the “find free space” algorithm. We’re talking about a few megabytes converted per second. Sigh. Cheers, Christian Theune -- Christian Theune · c...@flyingcircus.io · +49 345 219401 0 Flying Circus Internet Operations GmbH · http://flyingcircus.io Forsterstraße 29 · 06112 Halle (Saale) · Deutschland HR Stendal HRB 21169 · Geschäftsführer: Christian. Theune, Christian. Zagrodnick
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
