Il 2020-09-15 23:30 Stuart D Gathman ha scritto:
My feeling is that btrfs is a better solution for the hourly snapshots.
(Unless you are testing a filesystem :-)
For fileserver duty, sure - btrfs is adequate.
For storing VMs and/or databases - no way, thinvol is much faster
Side note: many btrfs guides suggest disabling CoW fixes btrfs
performance issue. Reality is that noCoW fixes them partially at best,
while at the same time disabling all advanced feature (checksum,
compression, etc). Snapshot automatically re-enable CoW for the
overwritten data.
I find "classic" LVs a robust replacement for partitions that are
easily
resized without moving data around. I would be more likely to try
RAID features on classic LVs than thin LVs.
I agree for classical LVM.
However thinvols permit much more interesting scenario.
Regards.
--
Danti Gionatan
Supporto Tecnico
Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it
email: g.danti@xxxxxxxxxx - info@xxxxxxxxxx
GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8
_______________________________________________
linux-lvm mailing list
linux-lvm@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm
read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/
