On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 09:28:37AM +, Filipe Manana wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 07:26:07PM -0600, Donald Pearson wrote:
> >> I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag
> >> behave
Hugo Mills posted on Tue, 22 Dec 2015 20:30:41 + as excerpted:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 09:28:37AM +, Filipe Manana wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
>> > On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 07:26:07PM -0600, Donald Pearson wrote:
>> >> I read an
On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 09:28 +, Filipe Manana wrote:
> Hum?
> How is that so? Snapshot-aware defrag was disabled almost 2 years
> ago,
> and that piece of code is used both by a "manual" defrag (ioctl) and
> by automatic defrag.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Could someone then please add an
On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 07:26:07PM -0600, Donald Pearson wrote:
> I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag
> behave differently in that autodefrag is more snapshot friendly for
> COW data.
>
> Did I understand that correctly? I have not been doing defrag on my
>
On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 8:14 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 07:26:07PM -0600, Donald Pearson wrote:
>> I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag
>> behave differently in that autodefrag is more snapshot friendly for
>> COW data.
>>
I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag
behave differently in that autodefrag is more snapshot friendly for
COW data.
Did I understand that correctly? I have not been doing defrag on my
virtual machine image directory because I do use a snapshot schedule
and the
Donald Pearson posted on Sun, 20 Dec 2015 19:26:07 -0600 as excerpted:
> I read an implication in a different thread that defrag and autodefrag
> behave differently in that autodefrag is more snapshot friendly for COW
> data.
>
> Did I understand that correctly? I have not been doing defrag on