Re: [Tails-dev] An outside of the box proposal re persistenc…

Delete this message

Reply to this message
Autor: alienpup
Data:  
A: tails-dev
Assumpte: Re: [Tails-dev] An outside of the box proposal re persistence backups
intrigeri,

> Hi alienpup,
>
> alienpup (2021-08-02):
> > The now rather lengthy (lengthy is good) discussion regarding Tails
> > persistence backup has not considered the benefits of an alternative
> > persistence file system, one designed with fast, easy backups in
> > mind. Of the several such file systems that come to mind, btrfs is
> > perhaps the easiest to implement. […]
> >
> > If the Tails persistence volume were a btrfs file system, any backup
> > application could be employed to copy data there. The btrfs
> > "snapshot" feature would then make what are in effect incremental
> > backups simple and fast. These snapshots require very little
> > additional storage space, and rather than being something special to
> > the btrfs file system, snapshots are basically subvolumes which can
> > be browsed and/or mounted. Importantly, any backup application
> > running on any other Linux file system can move data into and out of
> > a btrfs file system. No walls, no fences, and no special backup file
> > formats required (though optional).
>
> The way I understand your suggestion:
>
> - This would not, in itself, solve the problem we focused on so far,
> that is having backups in the first place (S1 on the blueprint): we
> still need $something to copy data to that (btrfs) filesystem on
> another storage device.
>
> - Instead, this could be an optional follow-up step to implementing
> backups via the "Clone Persistence in Tails Installer" solution
> we've picked so far. It would solve S4 via incremental backups.
>
> - The implementation draft we have on the blueprint for the "Clone
> Persistence in Tails Installer" solution, based on rsync, is
> entirely compatible with your suggestion. It does not prevent us
> from switching to a different filesystem for Persistent Storage
> later, and taking btrfs snapshots before/after updating the backups,
> if/when we identify S4 as a priority.
>
> Correct?


Absolutely. Sorry for not being more specific in my last post. Btrfs snapshots would allow us to efficiently preserve data backups already written to the persistence volume. The content of all snapshots, hence a history of user data, would remain accessible to the user.

I've long employed rsync in conjunction with btrfs snapshots to facilitate backups. Each of my backup media is formatted btrfs, Each of my computers has user data (/home) on a separate partition formatted btrfs. Boot and system partitions remain ext4. Come backup time, I:

- use rsync to copy the contents of the boot and system partitions to a subvolume on the backup drive.
- create a snapshot of this subvolume.
- create a snapshot of user's data in /home.
- use btrfs send/receive to copy this snapshot to the backup drive.

Rsync and btrfs each rock. In combination, they're hard to beat.

alienpup

> _______________________________________________
> Tails-dev mailing list
> Tails-dev@???
> https://www.autistici.org/mailman/listinfo/tails-dev
> To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to
> Tails-dev-unsubscribe@???.
>