Le 27/10/2016 à 19:00, Aaron Ogle a écrit : > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 11:56 AM Kyle Fazzari > <kyle.fazz...@canonical.com <mailto:kyle.fazz...@canonical.com>> wrote: > > > So are you storing this database in $SNAP_COMMON? Because > $SNAP_DATA would do this for you, no? > > > Correct we are doing in $SNAP_COMMON. Is $SNAP_DATA using CoW? Or is > it going to be a full copy. From what I could see it was a full > copy. This would quickly add up. Not to mention you loose all of our > messages sent when you roll back.
I would suggest to use $SNAP_DATA. Once we have garbage collection enabled on snapd, you will have approx. 2 copies at most of your data (the old version and the current one). I guess this is a reasonable tradeoff to ensure you can always revert safely. Imagine the case if a new version corrupts your data. You will not have any way to retrieve them back if you store in $SNAP_COMMON, whichever downgrade scripts you are writing… So, I would argue to try $SNAP_DATA first, and then only revisit to move to $SNAP_COMMON if you see that doesn't suit you. Making sense? Didier
-- Snapcraft mailing list Snapcraft@lists.snapcraft.io Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/snapcraft
