Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: lee <lee@××××××××.de>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] snapshots?
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 10:44:36
Message-Id: 87lh891udw.fsf@heimdali.yagibdah.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] snapshots? by "Stefan G. Weichinger"
1 "Stefan G. Weichinger" <lists@×××××.at> writes:
2
3 > On 12/30/2015 10:14 PM, lee wrote:
4 >> Hi,
5 >>
6 >> soon I'll be replacing the system disks and will copy over the existing
7 >> system to the new disks. I'm wondering how much merit there would be in
8 >> being able to make snapshots to be able to revert back to a previous
9 >> state when updating software or when installing packages to just try
10 >> them out.
11 >>
12 >> To be able to make snapshots, I could use btrfs on the new disks. When
13 >> using btrfs, I could use the hardware RAID-1 as I do now, or I could use
14 >> the raid features of btrfs instead to create a RAID-1.
15 >>
16 >>
17 >> Is it worthwhile to use btrfs?
18 >
19 > Yes.
20 >
21 > ;-)
22 >
23 >> Am I going to run into problems when trying to boot from the new disks
24 >> when I use btrfs?
25 >
26 > Yes.
27 >
28 > ;-)
29 >
30 > well ... maybe.
31 >
32 > prepare for some learning curve. but it is worth it!
33
34 So how does that go? Having trouble to boot is something I really don't
35 need.
36
37 >> Am I better off using the hardware raid or software raid if I use btrfs?
38 >
39 > I would be picky here and separate "software raid" from "btrfs raid":
40 >
41 > software raid .. you think of mdadm-based software RAID as we know it in
42 > the linux world?
43
44 I'm referring to the software raid btrfs uses.
45
46 > btrfs offers RAID-like redundancy as well, no mdadm involved here.
47 >
48 > The general recommendation now is to stay at level-1 for now. That fits
49 > your 2-disk-situation.
50
51 Well, what shows better performance? No btrfs-raid on hardware raid or
52 btrfs raid on JBOD?
53
54 >> Suggestions?
55 >
56 > I would avoid converting and stuff.
57 >
58 > Why not try a fresh install on the new disks with btrfs?
59
60 Why would I want to spend another year to get back to where I'm now?
61
62 > You can always step back and plug in the old disks.
63 > You could even add your new disks *beside the existing system and set up
64 > a new rootfs alongside (did that several times here).
65
66 The plan is to replace the 3.5" SAS disks with 1TB disks. There is no
67 room to fit any more 3.5" disks. Switching disks all the time is not an
68 option.
69
70 That's why I want to use the 2.5" SAS disks. But I found out that I
71 can't fit those as planned. Unless I tape them to the bottom of the
72 case or something, I'm out of options :( However, if tape them, I could
73 use 4 instead of two ...
74
75 > There is nearly no partitioning needed with btrfs (one of the great
76 > benefits).
77
78 That depends. Try to install on btrfs when you have 4TB disks. That
79 totally sucks, even without btrfs. Add btrfs and it doesn't work at
80 all --- at least not with Debian, though I was thinking all the time
81 that if that wasn't Debian but Gentoo, it would just work ...
82
83 With 72GB disks, there's nearly no partitioning involved, either. And
84 the system is currently only 20GB, including two VMs.
85
86 > I never had /boot on btrfs so far, maybe others can guide you with this.
87 >
88 > My /boot is plain extX on maybe RAID1 (differs on
89 > laptops/desktop/servers), I size it 500 MB to have space for multiple
90 > kernels (especially on dualboot-systems).
91 >
92 > Then some swap-partitions, and the rest for btrfs.
93
94 There you go, you end up with an odd setup. I don't like /boot
95 partitions. As well as swap partitions, they need to be on raid. So
96 unless you use hardware raid, you end up with mdadm /and/ btrfs /and/
97 perhaps ext4, /and/ multiple partitions. When you use hardware raid, it
98 can be disadvantageous compared to btrfs-raid --- and when you use it
99 anyway, things are suddenly much more straightforward because everything
100 is on raid to begin with.
101
102 We should be able to get away with something really straightforward,
103 like btrfs-raid on unpartitioned devices and special provisions in btrfs
104 for swap space so that we don't need extra swap partitions anymore. The
105 swap space could even be allowed to grow (to some limit) and shrink back
106 to a starting size after a reboot.
107
108 > So you will have something like /dev/sd[ab]3 for btrfs then.
109
110 But I want straightforward :)
111
112 > Create your btrfs-"pool" with:
113 >
114 > # mkfs.btrfs -m raid1 -d raid1 /dev/sda3 /dev/sdb3
115 >
116 > Then check for your btrfs-fs with:
117 >
118 > # btrfs fi show
119 >
120 > Oh: I realize that I start writing a howto here ;-)
121
122 That doesn't work without an extra /boot partition?
123
124 How's btrfs's performance when you use swap files instead of swap
125 partitions to avoid the need for mdadm?
126
127 > In short:
128 >
129 > In my opinion it is worth learning to use btrfs.
130 > checksums, snapshots, subvolumes, compression ... bla ...
131 >
132 > It has some learning curve, especially with a distro like gentoo.
133 > But it is manageable.
134
135 Well, I found it pretty easy since you can always look up how to do
136 something. The question is whether it's worthwhile or not. If I had
137 time, I could do some testing ...
138
139 Now I understand that it's apparently not possible to simply make a
140 btrfs-raid1 from the two raw disks, copy the system over, install grub
141 and boot from that. (I could live with swap files instead of swap
142 partitions.)
143
144 > As mentioned here several times I am using btrfs on >6 of my systems for
145 > years now. And I don't look back so far.
146
147 And has it always been reliable?

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] snapshots? Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>