From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from magic.merlins.org ([209.81.13.136]:42797 "EHLO mail1.merlins.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754412AbaEEFXN (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 01:23:13 -0400 Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 22:22:52 -0700 From: Marc MERLIN To: Brendan Hide Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Using mount -o bind vs mount -o subvol=vol Message-ID: <20140505052252.GJ10159@merlins.org> References: <20140504004732.GE9061@merlins.org> <5365E74B.6020805@swiftspirit.co.za> <20140505005644.GB10159@merlins.org> <53670FEA.8050806@swiftspirit.co.za> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <53670FEA.8050806@swiftspirit.co.za> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 06:13:30AM +0200, Brendan Hide wrote: > >Oh, really, it's slower to mount the device directly? Not that I really > >care, but that's unexpected. > > Um ... the penalty is if you're mounting indirectly. ;) I'd be willing to believe that more then :) (but indeed, if slowdown there is, it must be pretty irrelevant in the big picture. Cheers, Marc -- "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R. Microsoft is to operating systems .... .... what McDonalds is to gourmet cooking Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | PGP 1024R/763BE901