Prototype for the time machine similar solution as you noted in h-u-b whiteboard.
rmjb at mail.com
Thu Nov 16 14:32:00 GMT 2006
Just a warning if the trend is to use LVM by default, this may cause
conflicts/issues if the user want to do some fancy disk work of their own,
like Soft-RAID or FakeRAID. Especially since FakeRAID device nodes created
by dmraid are created in /dev/mapper.
- Richard Bailey
On 11/16/06, ubuntu-devel-request at lists.ubuntu.com <
ubuntu-devel-request at lists.ubuntu.com> wrote:
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 10:58:14 +0200
> From: Sivan Greenberg <sivan at ubuntu.com>
> Subject: Re: Prototype for the time machine similar solution as you
> noted in h-u-b whiteboard.
> To: Erast Benson <erast at gnusolaris.org>
> Cc: ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com, Ulrik Mikaelsson
> <ulrik.mikaelsson at gmail.com>
> Message-ID: <455C2826.1020500 at ubuntu.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
> Erast Benson wrote:
> > I think you are right. And LVM is the right place to do such things.
> > Unfortunetly it is quite limited on functionality. OpenSolaris's ZFS
> > would be way better fit, but it is not an option for GNU/Linux users at
> > the moment.
> I wasn't suggesting that it was not the right tool for the job, and I
> regret if that is what was implied from my reply. Lets take this further
> then, to make this work for the average user we need:
> 1) Use LVM by default to set up users system and storage.
> 2) Automatically create the LV that will store the snapshots for the
> user. This should probably be carried by a question to the user about
> how robust he wants his "going-back-in-time" ability and explain to him
> the proportional need for redundant disk space.
> 3) develop a simple UI on top of the tools to manage the snapshots such
> that it would be easy for the user to track changes, see in which
> snapshot the content he wants is, and allow him easily and safely return
> to any of the snapshots requiring minimum understanding to what goes
> behind the scenes in order to do so.
> So if this was to be a spec, it would have been dependant on an "Enable
> LVM by default" one. We should probably examine the situation in
> Fedora/Redhat to see the benefits and the downsides of enabling LVM by
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ubuntu-devel