On 09/11/2017 07:49 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > Unfortunately, I don't know of any overlay mount implementation that > works correctly and reliably with BTRFS. I know for a fact that > OverlayFS (the upstream in-kernel implementation) does not work, and I > believe that AUFS3 and UnionFS (the third-party options that are used by > most LiveCD's) don't work either. UnionFS-FUSE (a userspace > implementation completely unrelated to UnionFS) might work, but I've > never tested it and it will likely have performance issues because it's > implemented in userspace. As far as I know, whiteout support is the > primary missing piece here, but I may be mistaken. >
Diverting away from the original topic, what issues with overlayfs and btrfs? I'm using btrfs to create 'base' operating system containers (btrfs) and then using overlayfs for a few 'upper' containers for specific applications, so the upper parts of the overlays contain only the config and data files and I can apply OS updates only on the lower ones. I do note that changes in the 'base' os can take time to propagate to the upper containers and I'm probably not being sensible in not stopping the upper containers when updating the lower ones. This is also does not seem to be what overlaysfs is intended for. However, for my light usage it generally works OK and is useful to me. Pete -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
