[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Common case to me is, how much would be freed by deleting the snapshots in
order of age from oldest to newest always starting with the oldest.
That would be possible. A given snapshot's "space used by this and all
prior snapshots" would be the prev snap's "used+prior"
Matthew,
I really do appreciate this discussion, thank you for taking the time to
go over this with me.
Matthew Ahrens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/04/2007 01:49:00 PM:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > [9:40am] [/data/test]:test% zfs snapshot data/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [9:41am] [/data/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[9:40am] [/data/test]:test% zfs snapshot data/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[9:41am] [/data/test]:test% zfs snapshot data/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
[9:42am] [/data/test/images/fullres]:test% zfs list
NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT
data/test 13.4G
Darren Dunham wrote:
Is the problem of displaying the potential space freed by multiple
destructions one of calculation (do you have to walk snapshot trees?) or
one of formatting and display?
Both, because you need to know for each snapshot, how much of the data
it references was first referen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/03/2007 04:21:00 PM:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > which is not the behavior I am seeing..
>
> Show me the output, and I can try to explain what you are seeing.
[9:36am] [~]:test% zfs create data/test
[9:36am] [~]:test% zfs set compression=on data/test
[9:37am]
> AFAIK, the manpage is accurate. The space "used" by a snapshot is exactly
> the amount of space that will be freed up when you run 'zfs destroy
> '. Once that operation completes, 'zfs list' will show that the
> space "used" by adjacent snapshots has changed as a result.
>
> Unfortunately,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
which is not the behavior I am seeing..
Show me the output, and I can try to explain what you are seeing.
AFAIK, the manpage is accurate. The space "used" by a snapshot is exactly
the amount of space that will be freed up when you run 'zfs destroy
'. Once that ope
Sorry a few corrections, and inserts..
>
> which is not the behavior I am seeing.. If I have 100 snaps of a
> filesystem that are relatively low delta churn and then delete half of
the
> data out there I would expect to see that space go up in the used column
> for one of the snaps (in my test
I am bringing this up again with the hopes that more eye may be on the list
now then before the holidays..
the zfs man page lists the usage column as:
used
The amount of space consumed by this dataset and all its
descendants. This is the value that is checked against
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 12/22/2006 04:50:25 AM:
> Hello Wade,
>
> Thursday, December 21, 2006, 10:15:56 PM, you wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> WSfc> Hola folks,
>
> WSfc> I am new to the list, please redirect me if I am posting
> to the wrong
> WSfc> location. I am starting to use ZFS in produc
Hello Wade,
Thursday, December 21, 2006, 10:15:56 PM, you wrote:
WSfc> Hola folks,
WSfc> I am new to the list, please redirect me if I am posting to the
wrong
WSfc> location. I am starting to use ZFS in production (Solaris x86 10U3 --
WSfc> 11/06) and I seem to be seeing unexpected b
11 matches
Mail list logo
