From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:49118 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753074AbaCFUhk (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Mar 2014 15:37:40 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WLf2v-0001C2-AF for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 21:37:37 +0100 Received: from 63.239.65.11 ([63.239.65.11]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 21:37:37 +0100 Received: from ericsbinaryworld by 63.239.65.11 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 21:37:37 +0100 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Eric Mesa Subject: Re: Understanding btrfs and backups Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 20:37:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Brian Wong wrote: a snapshot is different than a backup, with a snapshot you're still accessing a read-only version of the live filesystem. i don't know the specifics of btrfs but if you take daily snapshots, you should be able to restore a single file from the five-days-ago snapshot by browsing that snapshot's directory tree and then copying the file to the live version of the filesystem, if that makes sense. in the snapshot case the live filesystem serves the same function as the full backup would if you did full backups then incrementals. the snapshots are the incrementals of the live filesystem, only going backwards in time whereas with backup you would take a full backup then go forward in time with incrementals. the filesystem takes care of making sure every snapshot is complete. in the snapshot case redundancy is then more important because you may not have a bunch of full backups (i.e. full copies) lying around. so full backups still are useful. -- OK, I THINK I understand things a bit better. So from the point of view of restoring a single file, that functionality is there. Excellent. And I guess you're saying that because the snapshots are diffs off the live system, that I'd need a backup of the live system - ie snapshots wouldn't be enough. But what if my first snapshot was a clone of the system at that point (as it seems from the article) And I back that up to a separate drive. Let me illustrate with what I plan to do exactly. Three hard drives: A, B, and C. Hard drives A and B - btrfs RAID-1 so that if one drive dies I can keep using my system until the replacement for the raid arrives. Hard drive C - gets (hourly/daily/weekly/or some combination of the above) snapshots from the RAID. (Starting with the initial state snapshot) Each timepoint another snapshot is copied to hard drive C. So in the case of a file disappearing on me or being over-written or w/e - I reach into the directory of the snapshot that contains the file just as I would now with the backup. So if that's what I'm doing, do snapshots become a way to do backups? Thanks