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

2023-03-04 Thread 449f09c92
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

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

2023-03-04 Thread Rusty Bird
-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)

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

2023-03-04 Thread Rusty Bird
-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

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

2020-12-12 Thread donoban
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

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-23 Thread Chris Laprise
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,

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-23 Thread Chris Laprise
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

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-22 Thread Franz
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

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-22 Thread johnyjukya
> -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

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-22 Thread Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
-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

Re: [qubes-users] BTRFS?

2016-09-22 Thread Connor Page
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?

2016-09-22 Thread Chris Laprise
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?

2016-09-22 Thread sejug
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?

2016-09-22 Thread Chris Laprise
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

Re: [qubes-users] btrfs vs lvm?

2016-05-30 Thread Chris Laprise
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