From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Roman Mamedov Subject: Re: Recommendations for RAID setup needed Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:03:04 +0500 Message-ID: <20150922100304.2372d85c@natsu> References: <55F85E9F.1070100@youngman.org.uk> <5600D61A.6000908@suddenlinkmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/7W2DBsPMOVQPELfd.nP_OVu"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5600D61A.6000908@suddenlinkmail.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "David C. Rankin" Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids --Sig_/7W2DBsPMOVQPELfd.nP_OVu Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 23:16:26 -0500 "David C. Rankin" wrote: > This is the exact reason NOT to use btrfs at the moment. The issue is=20 > with the 'snap shotting' feature which can quietly fill your disk with=20 > snap shots to the point of space exhaustion that has resulted in the=20 > complete loss of information in a number of instances. Snapshots is not something Btrfs "quietly" makes on its own, snapshots are something *you* create. Snapshots of static and unmodified data are essenti= ally free in terms of disk space (due to CoW only the changes from the point snapshot was taken and further on, will require additional space); and if y= ou heavily modify your files and want to also keep a trail of snapshots, it's = of course up to you to ensure you have enough disk space for that. --=20 With respect, Roman --Sig_/7W2DBsPMOVQPELfd.nP_OVu Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlYA4QgACgkQTLKSvz+PZwjJnwCfZcCZ2x8jPKG0Tre/J6byjL2S Z2IAn3zAFDy/g4o6woLalHO2oym6w9ht =6IRZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/7W2DBsPMOVQPELfd.nP_OVu--