Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-15 Thread Richard Jahnel
Thank you for the corrections. Also I forgot about using an SSD to assist. My bad. =) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-15 Thread Paul Archer
3:26pm, Daniel Carosone wrote: On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 09:04:50PM -0500, Paul Archer wrote: I realize that I did things in the wrong order. I should have removed the oldest snapshot first, on to the newest, and then removed the data in the FS itself. For the problem in question, this is

Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-14 Thread Richard Jahnel
This sounds like the known issue about the dedupe map not fitting in ram. When blocks are freed, dedupe scans the whole map to ensure each block is not is use before releasing it. This takes a veeery long time if the map doesn't fit in ram. If you can try adding more ram to the system. --

Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-14 Thread Paul Archer
7:51pm, Richard Jahnel wrote: This sounds like the known issue about the dedupe map not fitting in ram. When blocks are freed, dedupe scans the whole map to ensure each block is not is use before releasing it. This takes a veeery long time if the map doesn't fit in ram. If you can try

Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-14 Thread Bill Sommerfeld
On 04/14/10 19:51, Richard Jahnel wrote: This sounds like the known issue about the dedupe map not fitting in ram. Indeed, but this is not correct: When blocks are freed, dedupe scans the whole map to ensure each block is not is use before releasing it. That's not correct. dedup uses a

Re: [zfs-discuss] dedup screwing up snapshot deletion

2010-04-14 Thread Daniel Carosone
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 09:04:50PM -0500, Paul Archer wrote: I realize that I did things in the wrong order. I should have removed the oldest snapshot first, on to the newest, and then removed the data in the FS itself. For the problem in question, this is irrelevant. As discussed in the