On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 08:31:05 +0200
Roman Kapusta roman.kapu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 00:03, Pat Regan theh...@patshead.com wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
Xavier Nicollet nicol...@jeru.org wrote:
Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
I turned off
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 00:03, Pat Regan theh...@patshead.com wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
Xavier Nicollet nicol...@jeru.org wrote:
Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
I turned off the 5-minute snapshots and I'm now just keeping 4
weekly, 7 daily, and 24 hourly
On Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:39:48 +0200
Xavier Nicollet nicol...@jeru.org wrote:
Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
I turned off the 5-minute snapshots and I'm now just keeping 4
weekly, 7 daily, and 24 hourly snapshots alive.
I have just rebooted and I am going with /15 minutes
Le 26 octobre 2010 à 15:15, Pat Regan a écrit:
I turned off the 5-minute snapshots and I'm now just keeping 4 weekly, 7
daily, and 24 hourly snapshots alive.
I have just rebooted and I am going with /15 minutes interval.
--
Xavier Nicollet
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
I can't reproduce this right know, but it seems that creating lots of
snapshots, one per minute (keeping only a dozens of them) may block the
system. Every btrfs snap processes stay idle and the load skyrockets to 900.
I use an old version: 2.6.34.5 kernel, and the system is still very
responsive
On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 12:28:53 +0200
Xavier Nicollet nicol...@jeru.org wrote:
I can't reproduce this right know, but it seems that creating lots of
snapshots, one per minute (keeping only a dozens of them) may block
the system. Every btrfs snap processes stay idle and the load
skyrockets to
