Hello,
I need to clarify, I'm _not_ sharing a drive between multiple computers
at the _same_ time. It's a portable device which I use at different
locations with different computers. I just wanted to give a rationale
for mounting the whole drive to some mountpoint and then also part of
that
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 12:18:37AM +0200, Sebastian Ochmann wrote:
I'm sharing a btrfs-formatted drive between multiple computers and each of
the machines has a separate home directory on that drive. The root of the
drive is mounted at /mnt/tray and the home directory for machine {hostname}
is
Original Message
Subject: Re: Is it safe to mount subvolumes of already-mounted volumes
(even with different options)?
From: Sebastian Ochmann ochm...@informatik.uni-bonn.de
To: Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com, zhe.zhang.resea...@gmail.com
Date: 2014年07月17日 15:58
Hello,
Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 17 Jul 2014 09:41:53 +0100 as excerpted:
and are there any combinations of possibly conflicting mount options
one should be aware of (compression, autodefrag, cache clearing)? Is it
advisable to use the same mount options for all mounts pointing to the
same physical
Hello,
I'm sharing a btrfs-formatted drive between multiple computers and each
of the machines has a separate home directory on that drive. The root of
the drive is mounted at /mnt/tray and the home directory for machine
{hostname} is under /mnt/tray/Homes/{hostname}. Up until now, I have
On Jul 16, 2014, at 4:18 PM, Sebastian Ochmann ochm...@informatik.uni-bonn.de
wrote:
Hello,
I'm sharing a btrfs-formatted drive between multiple computers and each of
the machines has a separate home directory on that drive.
2+ computers writing to the same block device? I don't see how
Hi Sebastian,
I posted a similar question and got many helpful answers:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg35047.html
Basically, you cannot guarantee that the computing mounting /dev/sdx
doesn't write to arbitrary addresses of /dev/sdxN as unallocated
blocks and thus
