|
|
|
|
|
by unqueued
1069 days ago
|
|
This is an example of how btrfs is poorly handled by many userland tools by default. You should never ever need to have thousands of snapshots. I use btrbk to manage my snapshots. It keeps my snapshots pruned to 300, pruning intermediate snapshots, so I can still easily step back 52 weeks, or I can purge them if I want to improve performance and reclaim space. While at the same time, every single snapshot is sent to two compressed encrypted backup images over ssh. The diff algorithm is pretty good, but for some types of files that fragment frequently, it is best to put them on their own subvolumes. My places.sqlite files from my browser testing profiles were adding tens or hundreds of MiB to snapshots, so they went in a seperate subvolume. I don't think the zfs would perform any better. I don't blame people for having bad experiences with btrfs, it is very inconsistently documented. I think it is especially annoying how many userland tools keep every single snapshot as a subvolume of the root, so that you have tens of millions of read-only files stored in /.snapshots. Awful. |
|
Has worked well for me so far and saved my butt a few times, and since I don't have a bunch of subvolumes to manage, I'm not overwhelmed. It's nice and simple, and I need nothing other than the default `btrfs` CLI utility.