Re: hard links across snapshots/subvolumes are actually a bad idea.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>> One thing I would like to see is copy-on-write hard-links. The hard-links
>>> that span snapshots should be possible, but they should be copy-on-write,
>>> i.e. as soon as hard-linked file that spans snapshots is written, the
>>> snapshot that wrote it should have it's own forked copy henceforth.
>>
>> There are sym-links, hard-links, and ref-links.  Cross device symlinks
>> are trivial.  Cross device hardlinks are evil.  Cross device ref-links
>> are just plain smart (and are at least partitially implemented in
>> btrfs;  does bcp work across subvolumes?).  :)
>
> Last time I asked a similar question, there was no equivalent thing to COW
> hard-links, across snapshots or otherwise. Hard-links spanning physical
> devices don't make sense. Hard-links spanning snapshots, however, do. In
> fact, I would intuitively expect that a snapshot contains only COW
> hard-links which would get COW-ed from both the head and the snapshot.

"COW hardlinks" are ref-links (as far as I'm concerned).  I said
partially implemented, because that's exactly what a snapshot is.  I'm
just not certain whether bcp works across subvolumes or not.  An
actual hardlink (i.e., all writes appear in all hardlinks) across any
file-system-like-structure (including subvolumes and snapshots) is
insane, for the reasons that I'm sure David offered to explain.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux