Re: [qubes-users] Btrfs (file-reflink): Why is the CoW on a volatile.img enabled?

Thank you for your clarification. Also, many thanks for maintaining the file-reflink storage driver. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-users+u

Re: [qubes-users] Btrfs (file-reflink): Why is the CoW on a volatile.img enabled?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Rusty Bird: > Disabling CoW and hence checksums (besides being specific to Btrfs - > file-reflink is filesystem agnostic) Although for volatile volumes in particular it might be possible to get away with (optionally, configured per-volume) attemptin

Re: [qubes-users] Btrfs (file-reflink): Why is the CoW on a volatile.img enabled?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 449f09c92: > had to edit the relevant code to disable CoW when volatile.img is > created file-reflink doesn't inherently do CoW for volatile volumes, it just defaults to whatever the underlying location on the filesystem does. For Btrfs, to get noco

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs for template/appvm

Hi, On 12/12/20 1:36 AM, 'keyandthegate' via qubes-users wrote: > I want to use btrfs for the snapshots feature in my appvms. > > I know Qubes supports btrfs for dom0: > https://github.com/QubesOS/qubes-issues/issues/2340 > > > Does Qubes sup

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On 09/23/2016 08:00 AM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:42:07AM -0400, Chris Laprise wrote: On 09/22/2016 07:12 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, Sep 22, 20

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 07:42:07AM -0400, Chris Laprise wrote: > On 09/22/2016 07:12 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:56:57PM -0700, Connor Page wrote: >

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On 09/22/2016 07:12 PM, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:56:57PM -0700, Connor Page wrote: In fact, I think the right question is "Will Qubes 4 be compatible with btrfs root if vm storage is expected to reside on a LVM

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:59 PM, wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:56:57PM -0700, Connor Page wrote: > >> In fact, I think the right question is "Will Qubes 4 be compatible with > >> btrfs root if vm storage is expected to reside on

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:56:57PM -0700, Connor Page wrote: >> In fact, I think the right question is "Will Qubes 4 be compatible with >> btrfs root if vm storage is expected to reside on a LVM thin pool?" > > This is a good question. The new

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 03:56:57PM -0700, Connor Page wrote: > In fact, I think the right question is "Will Qubes 4 be compatible with btrfs > root if vm storage is expected to reside on a LVM thin pool?" This is a good question. The new storage ha

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

In fact, I think the right question is "Will Qubes 4 be compatible with btrfs root if vm storage is expected to reside on a LVM thin pool?" -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On 09/22/2016 02:08 PM, se...@redhat.com wrote: On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 1:39:20 PM UTC-4, Chris Laprise wrote: On 09/22/2016 01:05 PM, johnyju...@sigaint.org wrote: Has the Qubes team ever considered the use of btrfs? Qubes tools will even utilize btrfs reflinks where possible, so

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 1:39:20 PM UTC-4, Chris Laprise wrote: > On 09/22/2016 01:05 PM, johnyju...@sigaint.org wrote: > > Has the Qubes team ever considered the use of btrfs? > > > > Qubes tools will even utilize btrfs reflinks where possible, so hardly > any extra space is used when

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

On 09/22/2016 01:05 PM, johnyju...@sigaint.org wrote: Has the Qubes team ever considered the use of btrfs? Qubes tools will even utilize btrfs reflinks where possible, so hardly any extra space is used when you clone a template or other vm. Chris -- You received this message because you ar

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

On 05/30/2016 11:35 AM, Rusty Bird wrote: Bahtiar `kalkin-` Gadimov: IMHO you should use LVM. Because btrfs is IMHO not mature enough. (Personal anecdote warning) I used it for backups until the partion become read-only and throw out of space warnings, for no obvious reason. On Qubes 3.0, I h

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

Bahtiar `kalkin-` Gadimov: > IMHO you should use LVM. Because btrfs is IMHO not mature enough. (Personal > anecdote warning) I used it for backups until the partion become read-only and > throw out of space warnings, for no obvious reason. On Qubes 3.0, I had the same issue: More than a couple of

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

Hi, Excerpts from Niels Kobschaetzki's message of 2016-05-29 21:36:38 +0200: > Why should I use btrfs or lvm with QubesOS? IMHO you should use LVM. Because btrfs is IMHO not mature enough. (Personal anecdote warning) I used it for backups until the partion become read-only and throw out of spac

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

Hi Chris, > On May 30, 2016 at 1:27 AM Chris Laprise wrote: > > On 05/29/2016 03:36 PM, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote: > > > Hi, > Hi Niels, Thanks a lot, very interesting post. I am really thinking about re-installing Qubes with BtrFS but I probably need a bigger SSD first. Niels -- You r

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Chris Laprise wrote: > > > On 05/29/2016 03:36 PM, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> is it just me or is in the documentation no explanation why one should >> use over the other? I also couldn't really find anything in the >> ML-archive. >> >> Why should I

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

On 05/29/2016 03:36 PM, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote: Hi, is it just me or is in the documentation no explanation why one should use over the other? I also couldn't really find anything in the ML-archive. Why should I use btrfs or lvm with QubesOS? I have in my head somewhere looming with real pr

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 2016-05-29 12:36, Niels Kobschaetzki wrote: > Hi, > > is it just me or is in the documentation no explanation why one > should use over the other? I also couldn't really find anything in > the ML-archive. > > Why should I use btrfs or lvm with Q