Thanks, this is helpful.
We are primarily scaling the number of snapshots. Unfortunately these
snapshots typically have very minor changes compared their parent, so
this sounds potentially problematic.
It sounds like I will need to do some testing of both snapshots and
quotas to determine scalabi
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 11:33:45AM -0700, Tristan Zajonc wrote:
> In an early thread Duncan mentioned that btrfs does not scale well in
> the number of subvolumes (including snapshots). He recommended
> keeping the total number under 1000. I just wanted to understand this
> limitation further. I
Tristan Zajonc posted on Tue, 11 Aug 2015 11:33:45 -0700 as excerpted:
> In an early thread Duncan mentioned that btrfs does not scale well in
> the number of subvolumes (including snapshots). He recommended keeping
> the total number under 1000. I just wanted to understand this
> limitation fur
If someone can answer Tristan's question, can they also add in if
large volumes of frequently created and destroyed snapshots/subvolumes
will cause issues? Or, if they're deleted quickly after being made,
is it just the number that exists at any given time that matters?
(Building source in chroot
Hi,
In an early thread Duncan mentioned that btrfs does not scale well in
the number of subvolumes (including snapshots). He recommended
keeping the total number under 1000. I just wanted to understand this
limitation further. Is this something that has been resolved or will
be resolved in the
