Am Freitag, 24. Mai 2013, 06:13:04 schrieb Duncan:
> > 2) Due to snapshots I know have well snapshots for my backup. And even
> > on SSD for my /home. I am not yet creating those in an automated way,
> > but well I do use them.
>
> As I already mentioned the warning on the wiki, do be aware of the
Am Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2013, 18:41:11 schrieb George Mitchell:
> On 05/23/2013 09:08 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > 3) As to my knowledge mount times of large partitions can be quite
> > long with ReiserFS 3.
>
> That may well be, but I certainly wouldn't consider btrfs mount times
> "fast" in
Martin Steigerwald posted on Thu, 23 May 2013 18:08:35 +0200 as excerpted:
> Am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2013, 13:19:31 schrieb Martin:
>> Yep, ReiserFS has stood the test of time very well and I'm still using
>> and abusing it still on various servers all the way from something like
>> a decade ago!
>
On 05/23/2013 09:08 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
3) As to my knowledge mount times of large partitions can be quite
long with ReiserFS 3.
That may well be, but I certainly wouldn't consider btrfs mount times
"fast" in such cases.
[root@localhost ghmitch]# time mount LABEL=BACKUP /backup
re
Am Dienstag, 21. Mai 2013, 13:19:31 schrieb Martin:
> Yep, ReiserFS has stood the test of time very well and I'm still using
> and abusing it still on various servers all the way from something like
> a decade ago!
Very interesting. I only used it for a short time and it worked.
But co-workers lo
On May 21, 2013, at 8:06 AM, Martin wrote:
> On 21/05/13 04:37, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> I'm going to contradict myself and point out that mount with label or
>> UUID is made unambiguous via either the default subvolume being
>> mounted, or the -o subvol= option being specified. The volume lab
In my case, I am backing up a system spanning five drives formatted
btrfs, on a separate drive containing a separate backup volume and
multiple complete backups, each from a different point in time. This
gives me protection from filesystem corruption, since the backups are on
a separate volume
Duncan,
Thanks for quiet a historical summary.
Yep, ReiserFS has stood the test of time very well and I'm still using
and abusing it still on various servers all the way from something like
a decade ago!
More recently I've been putting newer systems on ext4 mainly to take
advantage of extents fo
On 21/05/13 04:37, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On May 20, 2013, at 7:08 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Chris Murphy posted on Sun, 19 May 2013 12:18:19 -0600 as
>> excerpted:
>>
>>> It seems inconsistent that mount and unmount allows a /dev/
>>> designation, but only mount honors labe
On 05/20/2013 08:59 PM, Duncan wrote:
Then I ran into hardware issues that turned out to be bad caps on my
8- year-old mobo (tho it was dual-socket first-gen opteron, which I
had upgraded to top-of-its-line dual-core Opteron 290s, thus four
cores @ 2.8 GHz, with 8 gigs RAM, so it wasn't as perf
George Mitchell posted on Mon, 20 May 2013 19:17:39 -0700 as excerpted:
> Duncan, The problem affects btrfs volumes that span multiple drive. If
> you are using btrfs on a single drive that works just fine. But in a
> multidrive situation, sometimes it works (when umount guesses the right
> dev
On May 20, 2013, at 7:08 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Chris Murphy posted on Sun, 19 May 2013 12:18:19 -0600 as excerpted:
>
>> It seems inconsistent that mount and unmount allows a /dev/ designation,
>> but only mount honors label and UUID.
>
> Yes.
I'm going to contradict mys
Duncan, The problem affects btrfs volumes that span multiple drive. If
you are using btrfs on a single drive that works just fine. But in a
multidrive situation, sometimes it works (when umount guesses the right
device name) and sometimes it fails (when umount guesses the wrong
device name).
Chris Murphy posted on Sun, 19 May 2013 12:18:19 -0600 as excerpted:
> On May 19, 2013, at 5:15 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
>
>> From a user perspective btrfs subvolumes have a lot in common with just
>> regular directories aka folders, and nothing in common with
>> (block)devices.
>> "Describing
On May 19, 2013, at 12:18 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> It's not possible to mount regular directories with other file systems. In
> some ways the btrfs subvolume behaves like a folder. In other ways it acts
> like a device. If you stat the mount point for btrfs subvolumes, you get a
> unique
On May 19, 2013, at 5:15 AM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
> On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:03:38 -0700
> George Mitchell wrote:
>
>> One the things that is frustrating me the most at this point from a user
>> perspective regarding btrfs is the current lack of virtual devices to
>> describe volumes and subvo
OK, so to summarise:
On 19/05/13 15:49, George Mitchell wrote:
> In reply to both of these comments in one message, let me give you an
> example.
>
> I use shell scripts to mount and unmount btrfs volumes for backup
> purposes. Most of these volumes are not listed in fstab simply because
> I do
In reply to both of these comments in one message, let me give you an
example.
I use shell scripts to mount and unmount btrfs volumes for backup
purposes. Most of these volumes are not listed in fstab simply because
I do not want to have to clutter my fstab with volumes that are used
only fo
On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:03:38 -0700
George Mitchell wrote:
> One the things that is frustrating me the most at this point from a user
> perspective regarding btrfs is the current lack of virtual devices to
> describe volumes and subvolumes.
From a user perspective btrfs subvolumes have a lot in
On 10/05/13 15:03, George Mitchell wrote:
> One the things that is frustrating me the most at this point from a user
> perspective ... The current method of simply using a
> random member device or a LABEL or a UUID is just not working well for
> me. Having a well thought out virtual device infra
One the things that is frustrating me the most at this point from a user
perspective regarding btrfs is the current lack of virtual devices to
describe volumes and subvolumes. The current method of simply using a
random member device or a LABEL or a UUID is just not working well for
me. Havin
21 matches
Mail list logo
