From Fedora Project Wiki

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
Moreover I was interested in contributing some time on nautilus patch for slider.
Rakesh 17 Nov, ||

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)