From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from www.humilis.net ([82.95.169.224]:60523 "EHLO panda.humilis.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1424741Ab2LFThu (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:37:50 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 20:37:48 +0100 From: Sander To: Martin Steigerwald Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, sander@humilis.net, Sylvain Alain Subject: Re: Question about btrfs snapshot delay and rm -rf delay Message-ID: <20121206193748.GA25875@panda> Reply-To: sander@humilis.net References: <20121206125908.GA31070@panda> <201212061952.46519.Martin@lichtvoll.de> <201212061955.11919.Martin@lichtvoll.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <201212061955.11919.Martin@lichtvoll.de> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Martin Steigerwald wrote (ao): > Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Martin Steigerwald: > > Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2012 schrieb Sander: > > > Sylvain Alain wrote (ao): > > > > Hi, right now I own this SSD : > > > > > > > > Intel SSD 520 Series MLC 120 Gigs > > > > > > > Also, this is my /etc/fstab > > > > /dev/sda3 /boot ext2 noauto,noatime,defaults > > > > /dev/sda1 /boot/efi vfat noauto,defaults > > > > /dev/sda4 / btrfs > > > > > > SSDs are sensitive to partitioning. Easiest is not to partition at all. > > > > Huh? How so? > > > > My Intel SSD 320 is partitioned and uses LVM in the biggest partition > > and is still just fine after 19 month. Media wearout indicator still at 100 > > (of 100). > > Or did you indirectly refer to partition alignment? Yes I did, I meant sensitive performance wise. I think your Intel 320 will survive just fine, but partition missalignment gives the controller quite a bit more work to do. Sander