LVM Snapshot Feature
Hi,
In your opinion, does it make sense to be able to create non-persistent snapshots ? In the case of a filesystem backup, a non-persistent snapshot would be a snapshot that we agree to lose in case of failure or reboot. If anything happens, a server administrator would have to recreate a new snapshot and then restart the backup. In this case, I think metadata could be stored in memory instead of on disk, which should improve LVM snapshot performance. Is this theory wrong, and is this something which can be implemented easily in the current LVM code ? Pascal -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel |
LVM Snapshot Feature
"Bombardier, Pascal" <pascal.bombardier@sap.com> writes:
> In your opinion, does it make sense to be able to create non-persistent > snapshots ? > In the case of a filesystem backup, a non-persistent snapshot would be a > snapshot that we agree to lose in case of failure or reboot. If anything > happens, a server administrator would have to recreate a new snapshot > and then restart the backup. Considering the current failure mode when a snapshot becomes 'full' (that is, when I run out of space to remap changed blocks the snapshot becomes corrupted) this is the only way I currently feel comfortable using LVM snapshots at all, so personally, I think snapshots that did not persist through reboots would be quite useful. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel |
LVM Snapshot Feature
On Aug,Friday 1 2008, at 9:35 AM, Bombardier, Pascal wrote:
Hi, In your opinion, does it make sense to be able to create non- persistent snapshots ? In the case of a filesystem backup, a non-persistent snapshot would be a snapshot that we agree to lose in case of failure or reboot. If anything happens, a server administrator would have to recreate a new snapshot and then restart the backup. In this case, I think metadata could be stored in memory instead of on disk, which should improve LVM snapshot performance. Is this theory wrong, and is this something which can be implemented easily in the current LVM code ? AFAIK non-persistent snapshots are already implemented see DM_PERSISTENT_DEV_FLAG ? I haven't look at linux kernel code how is it done but when I solve my lvcreate -s bug on NetBSD non-persistent snapshots are next :). Regards Adam. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel |
LVM Snapshot Feature
On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Adam Hamsik wrote:
> On Aug,Friday 1 2008, at 9:35 AM, Bombardier, Pascal wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > In your opinion, does it make sense to be able to create non-persistent > > snapshots ? > > In the case of a filesystem backup, a non-persistent snapshot would be a > > snapshot that we agree to lose in case of failure or reboot. If anything > > happens, a server administrator would have to recreate a new snapshot > > and then restart the backup. > > In this case, I think metadata could be stored in memory instead of on > > disk, which should improve LVM snapshot performance. > > > > Is this theory wrong, and is this something which can be implemented > > easily in the current LVM code ? > > > > AFAIK non-persistent snapshots are already implemented see > DM_PERSISTENT_DEV_FLAG ? I haven't look at linux kernel code how is > it done but when I solve my lvcreate -s bug on NetBSD non-persistent > snapshots are next :). > > Regards > > Adam. Yes. They are implemented in device mapper in kernel --- but no userspace lvm tool can use them. You can only create them using dmsetup. Mikulas -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel |
LVM Snapshot Feature
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 4:15 PM, Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008, Adam Hamsik wrote: > >> On Aug,Friday 1 2008, at 9:35 AM, Bombardier, Pascal wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > In your opinion, does it make sense to be able to create non-persistent >> > snapshots ? >> > In the case of a filesystem backup, a non-persistent snapshot would be a >> > snapshot that we agree to lose in case of failure or reboot. If anything >> > happens, a server administrator would have to recreate a new snapshot >> > and then restart the backup. >> > In this case, I think metadata could be stored in memory instead of on >> > disk, which should improve LVM snapshot performance. >> > >> > Is this theory wrong, and is this something which can be implemented >> > easily in the current LVM code ? >> > >> >> AFAIK non-persistent snapshots are already implemented see >> DM_PERSISTENT_DEV_FLAG ? I haven't look at linux kernel code how is >> it done but when I solve my lvcreate -s bug on NetBSD non-persistent >> snapshots are next :). >> >> Regards >> >> Adam. > > Yes. They are implemented in device mapper in kernel --- but no userspace > lvm tool can use them. You can only create them using dmsetup. > > Mikulas Do you have list of commands which I have to run to create persistent dm snapshot with dmsetup ? It would be handy to test my driver with dmsetup first and only after that use lvm2tools to create persistent/non-persistent snapshots. Regards Adam. -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14 AM. |
VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.