2011/12/30 Jaromir Zdrazil <jaromir.zdra...@email.cz>: >> > Just to add, I would like to see a two way mirror solution, but if it will >> > not >> work now/is not implemnted yet, I would propably choose between drbd in >> asynchronous mode or make a some kind if "incremental" snapshot to a remote >> mapped disk (I do not know yet, if brtfs support it) - it means have one >> shapshop and let's say have a daily incremental update of this snapshot. >> >> You mean like "zfs send -i"? If yes, why not just use zfs? There's >> zfsonlinux project, with easy-to-install ppa for ubuntu. Or you could >> compile it manually. >> > Thank you for your suggestion. As I know, there is not everything ported yet, > and one of the missing important features I plan to use is to crypt fs.
correct. But btrfs doesn't do encryption as well. And if you're thinking of using luks/dm-crupt to provide encryption for btrfs, there's nothing preventing you to use the same thing with zfs. > And if I am not mistaken, current version does not yet support a mountable > filesystem. You're mistaken :) With some extra work, you can even use it as root: - http://zfsonlinux.org/example-zpl.html - https://github.com/dajhorn/pkg-zfs/wiki/HOWTO-install-Ubuntu-to-a-Native-ZFS-Root-Filesystem >> > >> > How would you do it? >> >> If you DO mean zfs-send-like-functionality, then you should ask about >> "btrfs send and receive", not "two way mirror" (which is not an >> accurate way to describe what you want). Also, send/receive ability >> does not mean it can act as two-way mirror. It CAN be an alternative >> to drbd async though. > > If I understand it correctly, the diff between send and receive and two way > mirror is that one is synchronous and the other is not (sends the signal that > the file have been succesfully written after all/one instance have been > succesfully written). > Maybe you can explain it a bit more. Two way: A replicates changes to B, and B can replicate it's own changes to A One way: A replicates changes to B, but B can not replicate it's own changes to A While drbd only supports synchronous mode for active-active setup, the generic "two way replication" does not have to be so. Also, just because something is synchronous does not automatically mean it supports two-way replication. Either way, neither zfs or the (planned) btrfs send/receive supports two-way/active-active setup. Both should (or will) work just fine for one-way replication. -- Fajar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
