> I did those test and here are results: > > r...@sl-node01:~# zfs list > NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT > mypool01 91.9G 136G 23K /mypool01 > mypool01/storage01 91.9G 136G 91.7G /mypool01/storage01 > mypool01/storag...@30032010-1 0 - 91.9G - > mypool01/storag...@30032010-2 0 - 91.9G - > mypool01/storag...@30032010-3 2.15M - 91.7G - > mypool01/storag...@30032010-4 41K - 91.7G - > mypool01/storag...@30032010-5 1.17M - 91.7G - > mypool01/storag...@30032010-6 0 - 91.7G - > mypool02 91.9G 137G 24K /mypool02 > mypool02/copies 23K 137G 23K /mypool02/copies > mypool02/storage01 91.9G 137G 91.9G /mypool02/storage01 > mypool02/storag...@30032010-1 0 - 91.9G - > mypool02/storag...@30032010-2 0 - 91.9G - > > As you can see I have differences for snapshot 4,5 and 6 as you > suggested to make a test. But I can see also changes on snapshot no. 3 > - I complain about this snapshot because I could not see differences > on it last night! Now it shows.
Well, the first thing you should know is this: Suppose you take a snapshot, and create some files. Then the snapshot still occupies no disk space. Everything is in the current filesystem. The only time a snapshot occupies disk space is when the snapshot contains data that is missing from the current filesystem. That is - If you "rm" or overwrite some files in the current filesystem, then you will see the size of the snapshot growing. Make sense? That brings up a question though. If you did the commands as I wrote them, it would mean you created a 1G file, took a snapshot, and rm'd the file. Therefore your snapshot should contain at least 1G. I am confused by the fact that you only have 1-2M in your snapshot. Maybe I messed up the command I told you, or you messed up entering it on the system, and you only created a 1M file, instead of a 1G file? > What is still strange: snapshots 1 and 2 are the oldest but they are > still equal to zero! After changes and snapshots 3,4,5 and 6 I would > expect that snapshots 1 and 2 are "recording" also changes on the > storage01 file system, but not... could it be possible that snapshots > 1 and 2 are somehow "broken?" If some file existed during all of the old snapshots, and you destroy your later snapshots, then the data occupied by the later snapshots will start to fall onto the older snapshots. Until you destroy the oldest snapshot that contained that data. At which time, the data is truly gone from all of the snapshots. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
