Hi,

From: "Russell Coker" <[email protected]>
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2014, "Peter Ross" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The article also mentions some speed issues especially in relation to
>> databases.
>
> COW filesystems use different blocks on disk every time a file is written
> to.

Yes.

>> I would be interested to know what Oracle says to databases on ZFS on
>> Solaris - and Btrfs on Linux systems (the later not supported by Oracle
>> yet, I believe, the first I am not sure about)
>
> The same performance issues apply to BTRFS and ZFS.  The significant
> difference is that L2ARC and ZIL can mitigate such problems

So Btrfs does not have this kind of features, I understand. Thanks for
pointing this out.

>> My gut feeling: Use Btrfs for "bread and butter" work and not if you need
>> 101% reliability. With backups and mirrors and failovers (which may be
>> in place anyway) you may be fine.
>
> If you want good reliability then you need backups and mirrors anyway.

Yes, no doubt.

But failover is a bit more tricky if you are dealing with instable nodes.

It is harder to catch an error (which triggers a failover) if there are
many ways to fail and some quite unexpected.

For the purpose of explanation: A switched off computer is easier to
detect than some data inconsistency which may "sleep" for a while before
being detected. You are buggered if you have two nodes with different
issues then.

>> I just do not get my head around why a subvolumes is called subvolume if
>> it is (according to the FAQ) comparable to a file system - you just can
>> have many of them in a pool.
>
> A subvolume is represented inside BTRFS in much the same way a
directory.  You
> can't mount one subvol without operating on the rest of the filesystem,
so if
> a filesystem is corrupted such that it can only be mounted RO then that
> applies to all subvols.

My tube may be glued to a wheel so you may have to replace the wheel in
order to replace the tube.

But I doubt that it makes my tube a wheel;-)

Something that is represented in much the same ways as a directory does
not look like a volume to me.

Every "subvolume" has a root, it can be mounted everywhere on the system -
as a file system does. It is organized on top of a block structure which
abstracts from physical devices (usually referred to as logical volumes)
and creates a directory structure on it - as a filesystem does.

My way of thinking of things and analogies and my imagination feels
slightly tricked by btrfs terminology;-)

But I won't continue arguing. I have been walking through the mountains in
a fog and I looked at a map and tried to make sense, until my friend
rotated the map by 180 degrees and we realized how much we lost
orientation...

I guess you walked through the Btrfs forest a bit longer than me.

Talking of forests - that's how I would call the whole "bunch of
filesystems" directory structure on top of a pool because you can have
many trees (filesystems) with their own roots in it (while a traditional
block device has one only)

Cheers
Peter

_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to