On Tue, Jul 08, 2008 at 11:41:20PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 08:22:56 +0200 > Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 08:13:21AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > > > This would mean that freeze and thaw will have to be done on the > > > > same file descriptor, but this isn't unreasonable to expect, is > > > > it? > > > > > > It is certainly not the current use case, where you run one command > > > to freeze the filesystem and another one to unfreeze it. > > > > So instead of > > > > freeze_fs mountpoint > > backup-command > > unfreeze_fs mountpoint > > > > the user would have do to > > > > run_freezed mountpoint backup-command > > > > I find the second one nicer, regardless of any reliability issues. > > nah he needs to do > > make_snapshot ; backup-command ; unref_snapshot. > > freezing isn't the right solution for the backup problem ;) You're forgetting that to take a snapshot you generally need to freeze the filesystem. ;) i.e: freeze; make_snapshot; unfreeze backup-command unref_snapshot Yes, dm_snapshot does the freeze/snapshot/unfreeze for you, but the point is there is a freeze in the example you gave. The argument against Miklos' version is that there may be multiple commands to execute while the fs is frozen. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
