1 |
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> Also how big is each snapshot of / and why are these necessary on an hourly |
4 |
> basiszfs ? |
5 |
|
6 |
Btrfs is COW, so snapshots only consume space as files change. If you |
7 |
have a read-only filesystem and snapshot it hourly the only space |
8 |
consumed by a snapshot will be a few metadata records. |
9 |
|
10 |
Snapshotting hourly would mostly be a convenience - in theory it |
11 |
should get you time-machine-like functionality just like hourly |
12 |
backups would, but with far less overhead and space use. |
13 |
|
14 |
In practice I stopped doing this, as btrfs can misbehave when you |
15 |
start getting a lot of snapshots accumulated (we're talking |
16 |
thousands). It probably doesn't help that I have VM images |
17 |
snapshotted (though these images have fairly low write volumes - the |
18 |
most active one does most of its writing to an nfs volume so only OS |
19 |
updates, logs, etc change the VM). When snapper would go to cleanup |
20 |
snapshots I'd get panics. I ended up having to write a script that |
21 |
deleted one snapshot every 30min over the course of days to clean up |
22 |
from that. Now I only manually snapshot periodically and I haven't |
23 |
had a problem with it. |
24 |
|
25 |
I suspect that as with many things btrfs-related that it will be |
26 |
worked out in time, though snapshots will always cause fragmentation |
27 |
as long as the filesystem does partial diffs. |
28 |
|
29 |
Rich |