Hey Guys, Its not possible yet to fracture a snapshot or clone into a self-standing filesystem is it? Basically, I''d like to fracture a snapshot/clone into is own FS so I can rollback past that snapshot in the original filesystem and still keep that data. Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Jason
I may not be understanding your usage case correctly, so bear with me.
Here is what I understand your request to be. Time is increasing from
left to right.
A -- B -- C -- D -- E
\
----- F -- G
Where E and G are writable filesystems and the others are snapshots.
I think you''re saying that you want to, for example, keep G and roll E
back to A, keeping A, B, F, and G.
If that''s correct, I think you can just clone A (getting H), promote H,
then delete C, D, and E. That would leave you with:
A -- H
\
-- B -- F -- G
Is that anything at all like what you''re after?
--Bill
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:00:03PM -0600, Jason J. W. Williams
wrote:> Hey Guys,
>
> Its not possible yet to fracture a snapshot or clone into a
> self-standing filesystem is it? Basically, I''d like to fracture a
> snapshot/clone into is own FS so I can rollback past that snapshot in
> the original filesystem and still keep that data.
>
> Thank you in advance.
>
> Best Regards,
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Hi Bill, You''ve got it 99%. I want to roll E back to say B, and keep G intact. I really don''t care about C, D or F. Essentially, B is where I want to roll back to, but in case B''s data copy doesn''t improve what I''m trying to fix I want to have copy of G''s data around so I can go back to how it. My order of operations would be something like this: 1.) Snapshot filesystem to preserve current state (snapshot F). 2.) Create clone of F (clone G). 3.) Roll the filesystem back to snapshot B. 4.) Maintain clone G data even though filesystem is at B. My concerns are: 1.) If I rollback to B after creating the clone, it will erase F and thereby the dependent clone G. 2.) If I promote the clone G, G will be the active filesystem data copy, when I want B to be the active data copy, I just want to keep G around. I apologize that this is coming out so confusingly. Please let me know if this is clear at all. I guess in a simple way, you could say I''d like to be able to rollback to any particular snapshot without having to lose any newer snapshot. Thereby giving the ability to roll-forward and backward. Thank you in advance very much! Best Regards, Jason On 10/18/07, Bill Moore <Bill.Moore at sun.com> wrote:> I may not be understanding your usage case correctly, so bear with me. > > Here is what I understand your request to be. Time is increasing from > left to right. > > A -- B -- C -- D -- E > \ > ----- F -- G > > Where E and G are writable filesystems and the others are snapshots. > > I think you''re saying that you want to, for example, keep G and roll E > back to A, keeping A, B, F, and G. > > If that''s correct, I think you can just clone A (getting H), promote H, > then delete C, D, and E. That would leave you with: > > A -- H > \ > -- B -- F -- G > > Is that anything at all like what you''re after? > > > --Bill > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:00:03PM -0600, Jason J. W. Williams wrote: > > Hey Guys, > > > > Its not possible yet to fracture a snapshot or clone into a > > self-standing filesystem is it? Basically, I''d like to fracture a > > snapshot/clone into is own FS so I can rollback past that snapshot in > > the original filesystem and still keep that data. > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > Best Regards, > > Jason > > _______________________________________________ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss >
Hi Bill, Thinking about this a little more, would this provide the ability to maintain B and G''s data for a rollback followed by a possible roll forward? 1.) Create a clone of snapshot_B (clone_B). 2.) Create a new current snapshot (snapshot_F). 3.) Create a clone of snapshot_F (clone_F). 4.) Promote clone_B. 5.) If clone_Bs data doesn''t work out, promote clone_F to roll forward. Thank you in advance. Best Regards, Jason On 10/18/07, Jason J. W. Williams <jasonjwwilliams at gmail.com> wrote:> Hi Bill, > > You''ve got it 99%. I want to roll E back to say B, and keep G intact. > I really don''t care about C, D or F. Essentially, B is where I want to > roll back to, but in case B''s data copy doesn''t improve what I''m > trying to fix I want to have copy of G''s data around so I can go back > to how it. > > My order of operations would be something like this: > > 1.) Snapshot filesystem to preserve current state (snapshot F). > 2.) Create clone of F (clone G). > 3.) Roll the filesystem back to snapshot B. > 4.) Maintain clone G data even though filesystem is at B. > > My concerns are: > > 1.) If I rollback to B after creating the clone, it will erase F and > thereby the dependent clone G. > 2.) If I promote the clone G, G will be the active filesystem data > copy, when I want B to be the active data copy, I just want to keep G > around. > > I apologize that this is coming out so confusingly. Please let me know > if this is clear at all. > > I guess in a simple way, you could say I''d like to be able to rollback > to any particular snapshot without having to lose any newer snapshot. > Thereby giving the ability to roll-forward and backward. > > Thank you in advance very much! > > Best Regards, > Jason > > On 10/18/07, Bill Moore <Bill.Moore at sun.com> wrote: > > I may not be understanding your usage case correctly, so bear with me. > > > > Here is what I understand your request to be. Time is increasing from > > left to right. > > > > A -- B -- C -- D -- E > > \ > > ----- F -- G > > > > Where E and G are writable filesystems and the others are snapshots. > > > > I think you''re saying that you want to, for example, keep G and roll E > > back to A, keeping A, B, F, and G. > > > > If that''s correct, I think you can just clone A (getting H), promote H, > > then delete C, D, and E. That would leave you with: > > > > A -- H > > \ > > -- B -- F -- G > > > > Is that anything at all like what you''re after? > > > > > > --Bill > > > > On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:00:03PM -0600, Jason J. W. Williams wrote: > > > Hey Guys, > > > > > > Its not possible yet to fracture a snapshot or clone into a > > > self-standing filesystem is it? Basically, I''d like to fracture a > > > snapshot/clone into is own FS so I can rollback past that snapshot in > > > the original filesystem and still keep that data. > > > > > > Thank you in advance. > > > > > > Best Regards, > > > Jason > > > _______________________________________________ > > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > > zfs-discuss at opensolaris.org > > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > >