Re: Multiple btrfs-cleaner threads per volume

2017-11-02 Thread Hans van Kranenburg
On 11/02/2017 04:26 PM, Martin Raiber wrote: > On 02.11.2017 16:10 Hans van Kranenburg wrote: >> On 11/02/2017 04:02 PM, Martin Raiber wrote: >>> snapshot cleanup is a little slow in my case (50TB volume). Would it >>> help to have multiple btrfs-cleaner threads? The block layer underneath >>>

Re: Multiple btrfs-cleaner threads per volume

2017-11-02 Thread Martin Raiber
On 02.11.2017 16:10 Hans van Kranenburg wrote: > On 11/02/2017 04:02 PM, Martin Raiber wrote: >> snapshot cleanup is a little slow in my case (50TB volume). Would it >> help to have multiple btrfs-cleaner threads? The block layer underneath >> would have higher throughput with more simultaneous

Re: Multiple btrfs-cleaner threads per volume

2017-11-02 Thread Hans van Kranenburg
Hi Martin, On 11/02/2017 04:02 PM, Martin Raiber wrote: > > snapshot cleanup is a little slow in my case (50TB volume). Would it > help to have multiple btrfs-cleaner threads? The block layer underneath > would have higher throughput with more simultaneous read/write requests. Just curious: *

Re: Multiple btrfs-cleaner threads per volume

2017-11-02 Thread Austin S. Hemmelgarn
On 2017-11-02 11:02, Martin Raiber wrote: Hi, snapshot cleanup is a little slow in my case (50TB volume). Would it help to have multiple btrfs-cleaner threads? The block layer underneath would have higher throughput with more simultaneous read/write requests. I think a bigger impact would be

Multiple btrfs-cleaner threads per volume

2017-11-02 Thread Martin Raiber
Hi, snapshot cleanup is a little slow in my case (50TB volume). Would it help to have multiple btrfs-cleaner threads? The block layer underneath would have higher throughput with more simultaneous read/write requests. Regards, Martin Raiber -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line