Le lundi 16 juin 2014, 12:16:33 Duncan a écrit :
> Does btrfs automatically add the ssd mount option or do you have to add
> it? If you have to add it, that means btrfs isn't detecting the ssd,
First time I mounted the freshly created filesystem, it actually added the
"ssd" option by itself. T
Swâmi Petaramesh posted on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 09:54:01 +0200 as excerpted:
> I created a BTRFS filesytem over LVM over LUKS encryption on an SSD
> [yes, I know...], and I noticed that the FS got created with metadata in
> "DUP" mode, contrary to what "man mkfs.btrfs" says for SSDs -> it would
> be s
On Mon, 16 Jun 2014 07:23:14 Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> I'd personally stay with the DUP profile, but then that's just me being
> paranoid. You will almost certainly get better performance using the
> SINGLE profile instead of DUP, but this is mostly due to it requiring
> fewer blocks to be encr
On 2014-06-16 07:18, Swâmi Petaramesh wrote:
> Hi Austin, and thanks for your reply.
>
> Le lundi 16 juin 2014, 07:09:55 Austin S Hemmelgarn a écrit :
>>
>> What mkfs.btrfs looks at is
>> /sys/block//queue/rotational, if that is 1 it knows
>> that the device isn't a SSD. I believe that LVM passes
Hi Austin, and thanks for your reply.
Le lundi 16 juin 2014, 07:09:55 Austin S Hemmelgarn a écrit :
>
> What mkfs.btrfs looks at is
> /sys/block//queue/rotational, if that is 1 it knows
> that the device isn't a SSD. I believe that LVM passes through whatever
> the next lower layer's value is, b
On 2014-06-16 03:54, Swâmi Petaramesh wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I created a BTRFS filesytem over LVM over LUKS encryption on an SSD [yes, I
> know...], and I noticed that the FS got created with metadata in "DUP" mode,
> contrary to what "man mkfs.btrfs" says for SSDs -> it would be supposed to be
> "SI
