From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxsystems.it ([79.7.78.67]:49738 "EHLO mail.linuxsystems.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752140AbeESI4j (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2018 04:56:39 -0400 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Niccol=F2_Belli?= To: Tomasz Pala Cc: "Austin S. Hemmelgarn" , David Sterba , Subject: Re: Any chance to get snapshot-aware =?iso-8859-1?Q?defragmentation=3F?= Date: Sat, 19 May 2018 10:56:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <06bf88aa-c585-45ac-a670-b81f3f747ce6@linuxsystems.it> In-Reply-To: <20180518235530.GA12463@polanet.pl> References: <4428b2eb-796a-4c1b-8527-a05532436da4@linuxsystems.it> <20180518162051.GS6649@twin.jikos.cz> <99d57070-a1df-45ef-8f7e-df832bd7ad92@linuxsystems.it> <20180518235530.GA12463@polanet.pl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On sabato 19 maggio 2018 01:55:30 CEST, Tomasz Pala wrote: > The "defrag only not-snapshotted data" mode would be enough for many > use cases and wouldn't require more RAM. One could run this before > taking a snapshot and merge _at least_ the new data. snapper users with hourly snapshots will not have any use for it.