From: "Swâmi Petaramesh" <swami@petaramesh.org>
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Using noCow with snapshots ?
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 10:22:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3839313.LSaoXm11Qk@zafu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pan$77cb2$eaaf65a0$d47fcc2f$d279fdb@cox.net>
Thanks Duncan for the perfect explanations.
>From this, I understand that I might get both better performance by setting my
akonadi dir to "nocow", and still be able to take a snapshot from time to
time, which is exactly what I need.
Besides this, I'm still wondering about the changes in data security that
turning a database to "NoCow" would bring, i.e. would the data still be well
protected in case of a system crash or power failure ?
I have precious data in there and wouldn't like to jeopardize its security for
a performance gain...
Kind regards.
Le mercredi 9 avril 2014 11:56:20 Duncan a écrit :
> Good questions. =:^)
>
> #2. That's from one of the devs when the question came up perhaps a
> couple months ago.
>
> On a NOCOW file the first write to a fileblock (4096 bytes) after a
> snapshot must still be COW, because the snapshot locks the old version in
> place, and now the fileblock has changed, so it MUST be written elsewhere
> despite the NOCOW in ordered to keep the snapshot as it was. However,
> the file does retain the NOCOW attribute and additional writes to the
> same fileblock will be in-place... until the next snapshot of course.
>
> This is why on filesystems with scripted snapshots as close as a minute a
> part (I even saw one guy say he was doing them every 30 seconds!!),
> setting NOCOW has very little value -- they aren't NOCOW on the first
> write after a snapshot, and with snapshots happening every minute...,
> Hourly snapshots are still likely to be a problem on a regularly changing
> file, tho with daily snapshots you'd probably save some fragmentation
> over the fairly short term anyway, but it'd still be a problem longer
> term.
>
> Which is why I suggest putting such files on a separate subvolume and not
> snapshotting that subvolume, since snapshots stop at the subvolume
> boundary. That gives NOCOW a chance to actually *BE* NOCOW.
--
Swâmi Petaramesh <swami@petaramesh.org> http://petaramesh.org PGP 9076E32E
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-09 11:15 Using noCow with snapshots ? Swâmi Petaramesh
2014-04-09 11:41 ` Hugo Mills
2014-04-09 11:56 ` Duncan
2014-04-10 8:22 ` Swâmi Petaramesh [this message]
2014-04-10 13:19 ` George Eleftheriou
2014-04-10 14:58 ` Duncan
2014-05-07 5:36 ` Russell Coker
2014-05-07 11:09 ` Duncan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3839313.LSaoXm11Qk@zafu \
--to=swami@petaramesh.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.