On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 03:03:47PM +0300, Nikolay Borisov wrote: > > > On 28.08.2017 11:07, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > > Thanks... > > > > Still a bit strange that it displays that entry... especially with a > > generation that seems newer than what I thought was the actually last > > generation on the fs. > > Snapshot destroy is a 2-phase process. The first phase deletes just the > root references. After it you see what you've described. Then, later, > when the cleaner thread runs again the snapshot's root item is going to > be deleted for good and you no longer will see it.
It's worth noting also that if the subvol is still used in some way (still mounted, nested subvol, processes with CWD in it, open files), then it won't be cleaned up until the usage stops. Basically the same behaviour as deleting a file. This could also explain the more recent than expected generation values. Hugo. -- Hugo Mills | "Big data" doesn't just mean increasing the font hugo@... carfax.org.uk | size. http://carfax.org.uk/ | PGP: E2AB1DE4 |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
