> From: Erik Trimble [mailto:erik.trim...@oracle.com] > Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 7:35 PM > > > Doesn't that defeat the purpose of a snapshot? > > > Eric hits > the > nail right on the head: you *don't* want to support such a "feature", > as it breaks the fundamental assumption about what a snapshot is (and > represents).
Ok, point taken, but what you've stated is just an opinion. It's not a fundamental necessity, or a mathematical necessity, or impossible to think otherwise, that a snapshot is 100% and always will be immutable. IMHO, for some people in some situations the assumption that a snapshot is identical to the way the FS was at some given time can be valuable. However: If your only option is to destroy the whole snapshot, in order to free up disk space occupied by some files in the snapshot ... Destroying the whole snapshot for some people in some situations can be even less desirable than destroying the subset of files you want freed from disk. There could be value in the ability to destroy some subset of files without destroying the whole snapshot. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
