3 ms·

Have you tried btrfs? It also has support for super-cheap copy-on-write operations which should make container images and the like a snap. Not sure if your con

by gcr 10y ago

Have you tried btrfs? It also has support for super-cheap copy-on-write operations which should make container images and the like a snap. Not sure if your container tool supports btrfs snapshots of course, but it's conceptually simple, right?

aorth 10y ago
For development containers, systemd-nspawn has had support for btrfs snapshots since 2014 or 2015. Simple to get going if you're on a Linux box with systemd, no other daemons or tools required.
cmurf 10y ago
I think the main issue here is Btrfs is still developing. Its kernel doc file still says it's for benchmarking and review. [1] CoreOS devs decided to switch from Btrfs to overlay(fs) about 17 months ago. That's a long, long time in Btrfs development "years" that's how much development happens on Btrfs. But I can't say if CoreOS would, had today's Btrfs been what they were using in 2014, would have changed their decision. RH/Fedora are very dm/LVM thinp snapshots with XFS centric for backing their containers. I think what you're seeing is distros are doing something different with their container backing approach in order to differentiate from other distros. Maybe it's a stab in the dark or spaghetti on the wall approach but in the end all of these storage backends are going to mature a lot in the interim, so ultimately it'll be good for everyone. [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/Documentation/filesystems/btrfs.txt?id=refs/tags/v4.5.4 https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-st...
takeda 10y ago
Isn't this issue inherent to all COW systems (ZFS, WAFL, btrfs)?
Annatar 10y ago
Btrfs has been in beta for how many years now? ZFS is protecting data in enterprise production environments since 2006 (Solaris 10 update 2).
- krondor 10y ago
  Btrfs is not beta, see the discussion re: maturity below. ZFS is an excellent filesystem, btrfs is an excellent filesystem. There is room for both excellent options for users.

by gcr 10y ago

aorth 10y ago

For development containers, systemd-nspawn has had support for btrfs snapshots since 2014 or 2015. Simple to get going if you're on a Linux box with systemd, no other daemons or tools required.

cmurf 10y ago

I think the main issue here is Btrfs is still developing. Its kernel doc file still says it's for benchmarking and review. [1] CoreOS devs decided to switch from Btrfs to overlay(fs) about 17 months ago. That's a long, long time in Btrfs development "years" that's how much development happens on Btrfs. But I can't say if CoreOS would, had today's Btrfs been what they were using in 2014, would have changed their decision. RH/Fedora are very dm/LVM thinp snapshots with XFS centric for backing their containers. I think what you're seeing is distros are doing something different with their container backing approach in order to differentiate from other distros. Maybe it's a stab in the dark or spaghetti on the wall approach but in the end all of these storage backends are going to mature a lot in the interim, so ultimately it'll be good for everyone. [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git/tree/Documentation/filesystems/btrfs.txt?id=refs/tags/v4.5.4 https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-st...

takeda 10y ago

Isn't this issue inherent to all COW systems (ZFS, WAFL, btrfs)?

Annatar 10y ago

Btrfs has been in beta for how many years now? ZFS is protecting data in enterprise production environments since 2006 (Solaris 10 update 2).

krondor 10y ago
Btrfs is not beta, see the discussion re: maturity below. ZFS is an excellent filesystem, btrfs is an excellent filesystem. There is room for both excellent options for users.