Talk:Features/SystemRollbackWithBtrfs

Wrangler Review 2009-11-22

 * 1) Please include a proposed release note.  Then I will send this on to FESCo.


 * Thank you,
 * poelcat 21:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Added.

Cjb 23:15, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Other Discussion

 * For whatever it's worth as a non-developer, I really like this. I think it's good to get some btrfs stuff implemented now so that Fedora is ready to fully utilize it whenever it's marked stable.


 * You mentioned that it would rollback user's home directories if they were btrfs as well. I have two questions about that. One, would it be possible/practical to default to a seperate /home volume for btrfs installations and, two, if it's on a seperate partition, but is also btrfs, would it still roll-back? IMO, it should be implemented so that it doesn't, but your feature proposal makes it sound like it would. - eqisow

Thanks for the comment. I was trying to keep things simple by having a single choice of snapshot name that would apply across all btrfs filesystems -- it would be easier not to have to present a matrix of each filesystem and the snapshot that should be active on it -- but I suspect you're right that the matrix is the right way to go.

Not sure about defaulting to a separate /home; I think that if someone chooses btrfs they're already way into specifying the disk setup completely manually. Worth thinking about, though.

Cjb 02:33, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There has been UI work on ZFS in OpenSolaris, we may like reuse it
 * http://blogs.sun.com/erwann/entry/zfs_on_the_desktop_zfs


 * Moreover I was interested in contributing some time on nautilus patch for slider.


 * Thanks,


 * Rakesh 17 Nov, rpandit@redhat.com || rakesh@fedoraproject.org

Cool. The Time Slider work looks exciting, I'm just wanting to take small steps and start out with whole-fs rollbacks. If you want to go for it, I think you should. :)

Cjb 15:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * We could make a subvolume for /home, in order to avoid the problem relative to having different partition for / and /home. Snapshotting is not recursive throught volumes, so personal datas remain untracked. Also, we could use a snapshot-directory (for example /snap), and set it as a subvolume, to avoid to have a fs tree like: /snap3/snap2/snap1 (and similar paths).
 * So, there are many possibility to make it flexible for this feature proposal :)


 * Frafra 16:03, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

That's an interesting idea, thanks. I don't think we can mandate any particular partition layout, but we can certainly recommend one that we think works best.

Cjb 19:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I think that make a subvolume for every user (/home/user) could be the best default option.
 * 1. Personal datas are untouched (that's important)
 * 2. If we want to implement Rakesh's idea, we need to have a separate subvolume for every user (if we make a subvolume only for /home, reverting changes will affect the other users also).


 * Frafra 13:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As the proposal is currently worded, it suggests that btrfs on *any* filesystem will trigger the yum snapshotting. Surely yum should only create a new snapshot if root is on btrfs? Also, the snapshot should probably also be done on whichever partitions hold yum-installed data (e.g. if there is a separate /usr or /var).


 * MichelSalim 02:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)