On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 07:26:07PM -0600, Donald Pearson wrote: > I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag > behave differently in that autodefrag is more snapshot friendly for > COW data. > > Did I understand that correctly? I have not been doing defrag on my > virtual machine image directory because I do use a snapshot schedule > and the way I understood things, a defrag would basically decouple the > live data from the snapshots and greatly increase utilization. > > It sounded like autodefrag does not have this problem?
Correct. > If that's true, is there any case where it would not be best practice > to mount with autodefrag enabled? When you are already tight on I/O bandwidth for your application. autodefrag increases the amount of I/O the disks do (because it's rewriting parts of the file near each write, as well as just the piece that's being written by userspace). Hugo. -- Hugo Mills | UNIX: Japanese brand of food containers hugo@... carfax.org.uk | http://carfax.org.uk/ | PGP: E2AB1DE4 |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
