On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Hugo Mills <h...@carfax.org.uk> wrote:
>    One minor thing -- you've still got nested subvolumes here. You can
> still run into the same kinds of management problems (not being able
> to use mv efficiently to move subvolumes around). "active" doesn't
> need to be a subvolume, it can (and, I'd argue, should) be an ordinary
> directory.

I agree. Or just incorporate into the naming convention of the
subvolume. I've been following a variation on the naming scheme in the
"What We Propose" here:
http://0pointer.net/blog/revisiting-how-we-put-together-linux-systems.html
which is more intended for stateless systems. I add a field at the end
:current vs :date where :date is yyyymmdd with an optional -X sequence
in case there's more than one snapshot per day.


-- 
Chris Murphy
--
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

Reply via email to