On Sat, Aug 04 2018 at 12:22pm -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Aug 04, 2018 at 10:36:50AM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote: > > dm-snapshost has really outdated design - it's been useful in the old age > > where megabyte was hell lot of space. > > > > Nowadays, when users do need to handle snapshots in multi gigabyte sizes and > > moreover have number of snapshots from the same volume taken over the time, > > want to take snapshot of snapshot of snapshot, the old snapshot simple kills > > all the performance, uses tons of resources and becomes serious bottleneck > > of your system and has lots of usability limitation. > > Fair enough. I don't think I would consider that makes dm-snapshot a > "steaming pile". For me, protection against data loss is Job One. What's your point Ted? Do you have _any_ intention of actually using anything DM or is this just a way for you to continue to snipe at it? > > That's where thin provisioning will shine.... > > The dm-thin development might want to take a look at what's currently > in Documentation/device-mapper/thin-privisioning.txt: > > Status > ====== > > These targets are very much still in the EXPERIMENTAL state. Please > do not yet rely on them in production. But do experiment and offer us > feedback. Different use cases will have different performance > characteristics, for example due to fragmentation of the data volume. > > If you find this software is not performing as expected please mail > dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx with details and we'll try our best to improve > things for you. > > Userspace tools for checking and repairing the metadata are under > development. > > Saying that dm-snapshot is a steaming pile and dm-thin is what > everyone should use doesn't seem to be consistent with the above. Maybe read your email from earlier today before repeating yourself: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/4/366 -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
