Hi Bill, Thinking about this a little more, would this provide the ability to maintain B and G's data for a rollback followed by a possible roll forward?
1.) Create a clone of snapshot_B (clone_B). 2.) Create a new current snapshot (snapshot_F). 3.) Create a clone of snapshot_F (clone_F). 4.) Promote clone_B. 5.) If clone_Bs data doesn't work out, promote clone_F to roll forward. Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Jason On 10/18/07, Jason J. W. Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Bill, > > You've got it 99%. I want to roll E back to say B, and keep G intact. > I really don't care about C, D or F. Essentially, B is where I want to > roll back to, but in case B's data copy doesn't improve what I'm > trying to fix I want to have copy of G's data around so I can go back > to how it. > > My order of operations would be something like this: > > 1.) Snapshot filesystem to preserve current state (snapshot F). > 2.) Create clone of F (clone G). > 3.) Roll the filesystem back to snapshot B. > 4.) Maintain clone G data even though filesystem is at B. > > My concerns are: > > 1.) If I rollback to B after creating the clone, it will erase F and > thereby the dependent clone G. > 2.) If I promote the clone G, G will be the active filesystem data > copy, when I want B to be the active data copy, I just want to keep G > around. > > I apologize that this is coming out so confusingly. Please let me know > if this is clear at all. > > I guess in a simple way, you could say I'd like to be able to rollback > to any particular snapshot without having to lose any newer snapshot. > Thereby giving the ability to roll-forward and backward. > > Thank you in advance very much! > > Best Regards, > Jason > > On 10/18/07, Bill Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I may not be understanding your usage case correctly, so bear with me. > > > > Here is what I understand your request to be. Time is increasing from > > left to right. > > > > A -- B -- C -- D -- E > > \ > > ----- F -- G > > > > Where E and G are writable filesystems and the others are snapshots. > > > > I think you're saying that you want to, for example, keep G and roll E > > back to A, keeping A, B, F, and G. > > > > If that's correct, I think you can just clone A (getting H), promote H, > > then delete C, D, and E. That would leave you with: > > > > A -- H > > \ > > -- B -- F -- G > > > > Is that anything at all like what you're after? > > > > > > --Bill > > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:00:03PM -0600, Jason J. W. Williams wrote: > > > Hey Guys, > > > > > > Its not possible yet to fracture a snapshot or clone into a > > > self-standing filesystem is it? Basically, I'd like to fracture a > > > snapshot/clone into is own FS so I can rollback past that snapshot in > > > the original filesystem and still keep that data. > > > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Jason > > > _______________________________________________ > > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
