From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:56204 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752748AbaDDMsJ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Apr 2014 08:48:09 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sw=E2mi?= Petaramesh To: Austin S Hemmelgarn Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BTRFS setup advice for laptop performance ? Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2014 14:48:09 +0200 Message-ID: <1847185.lRc2jIirHz@fnix> In-Reply-To: <533EA686.5030909@gmail.com> References: <2692878.dRG1K49eOP@fnix> <533EA686.5030909@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le vendredi 4 avril 2014 08:33:10 Austin S Hemmelgarn a écrit : > > However I'm still concerned with chronic BTRFS dreadful performance and > > still find that BRTFS degrades much over time even with periodic defrag > > and "best practices" etc. > > I keep hearing this from people, but i personally don't see this to be > the case at all. I'm pretty sure the 'big' performance degradation that > people are seeing is due to how they are using snapshots, not a result > using BTRFS itself (I don't use them for anything other than ensuring a > stable system image for rsync and/or tar based backups). Maybe I was wrong to suppose that if a feature exists, it is supposed to be usable... I have used ZFS for years, and on ZFS having *hundreds* of snapshots of any given FS have exactly zero impact on performance... With BTRFS, some time ago I tried to use SuSE "snapper" that passes its time doing and releasing snapshots, but it soon made my systems unusable... Now, I only keep 2-3 manually made snapshots just for keeping a "stable and OK archive of my machine in a known state" just in case... But if even this has a noticeable negative impact on BTRFS performance, then what the hell are BTRFS snapshots good at ?? Kind regards. -- Swâmi Petaramesh http://petaramesh.org PGP 9076E32E