From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [172.16.48.31]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id iAJGdGr04327 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:39:16 -0500 Received: from leviathan.ele.uri.edu (leviathan.ele.uri.edu [131.128.51.64]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id iAJGdFOk004080 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:39:15 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (leviathan [131.128.51.64]) by leviathan.ele.uri.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id iAJGd7qr013298 for ; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:39:07 -0500 (EST) From: Ming Zhang Message-Id: <1100882347.2984.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 11:39:07 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [linux-lvm] relocate on write for snapshot Reply-To: mingz@ele.uri.edu, LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Hi, I wonder if there are any thought about a relocate on write policy for snapshot instead of copy on write policy used now? instead of copy old one to snapshot, overwrite old one with new one, 2 writes and 1 reads. it is possible that write new data to a usused location directly. i know later remove a snaphot will be a little trouble, but there must be some way to get around it. just a rough thought, any comment? ming