Well now that btrfs has been mentioned ..... :)
Are we planning to adopt it as default soon as upstream releases
stable? or possibly just shoot for alternative if default would be too
ambitious?
-Adam
2009/3/26 Jonathan Dieter <jdieter(a)gmail.com>:
On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 14:30 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote:
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Neal Becker wrote:
>
> >
http://tech.xerces.com/unbreakable-upgrades-zfs-and-apt-get.geek
> >
>
> Here's how this would work in the yum world:
>
> 1. if any package from @core (or any of their deps) are being upgraded
> then run an lvm snapshot and store it/add it to grub
> 2. proceed with update
>
> If anyone would like to write the lvm snapshot rootfs and store/add it to
> grub I can write the yum plugin to do the rest.
>
> It's not radically exciting code.
>
> In yum you wouldn't even need to stop the yum update command and ask the
> user to run a separate program.
My experience with lvm snapshotting was that it slowed down disk speeds
significantly. I would expect that filesystem based snapshotting (which
btrfs will have) might be more efficient. Or we could make sure the
snapshot is only left long enough to make sure the updates work.
Jonathan
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\
www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments