On Fri, 2014-01-10 at 00:10 -0600, Serge Hallyn wrote: > > smart enough to ignore hidden directories)? Alternatively, the snapshot > > folder could alternatively be rootfs.snap under the container folder > > That might be ok, but not named 'rootfs.snap' since rootfs implies it's > not a collection of full container snapshots. But that might be more > problematic with zfs.
Then snapshots as a peer to rootfs make more sense. I like the simplicity of having the snapshots be related to the container itself, rather than the system as a whole. However this would necessitate changing completely how the snapshot restore functions. Currently it just blows away the entire container config and restores (incorrectly in the case of btrfs, as my other e-mail described), rather than just updating the rootfs itself. John -- JOHN PEACOCK senior software build and release engineer www.messagesystems.com twitter @MessageSystems tel 410-872-4910 x239 email john.peac...@messagesystems.com _______________________________________________ lxc-devel mailing list lxc-devel@lists.linuxcontainers.org http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-devel
