I use Btrfs with Parabola GNU/Linux-libre, a derivative distribution of Arch Linux. I use no snapshot management tools such as Snapper or Timeshift. I keep my system minimal and tidy. Everything is boring and predictable. I do not bork my system by mistake, except when something breaks after an odd update, usually once or twice per year. When it happens, I find a workaround (usually something needs to be downgraded) and file a bug report if there is none.
When I need to tinker with something that can possibly go out of control, like installing a new package for a program that I want to try out and I am not sure I will want to keep it, I take a snapshot of my current “pristine” system and boot into it. In the snapshot copy of my system I do all the dirty stuff I want to try out. When I am satisfied with my findings, I reboot into the main subvolume and delete the snapshot.
It seems to me that most people use Btrfs snapshots preemptively in case of unexpected failure. I use snapshots exactly when I know I am going to do something that can lead to instability or «OS rot». Am I the only one using Btrfs snapshots like this?
“Except when something breaks after an odd update once or twice per year”
You don’t need snapshots, except for the moments when you do. The point of snapshots is that they’re so cheap that you can let them roll on their own and only care about them the day your system breaks.
A broken system is no big deal for me, I can easily get up and running after a failed update. My data is also mirrored to my Nextcloud instance.
You have to reboot yes, however only once. The step where you boot into your snapshot is redundant.
Yes, now I understand.