On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 03:18:34PM -0500, Miles Nordin wrote: > >>>>> "gm" == Gary Mills <mi...@cc.umanitoba.ca> writes: > > gm> destroys the oldest snapshots and creates new ones, both > gm> recursively. > > I'd be curious if you try taking the same snapshots non-recursively > instead, does the pause go away?
I'm still collecting statistics, but that is one of the things I'd like to try. > Because recursive snapshots are special: they're supposed to > atomically synchronize the cut-point across all the filesystems > involved, AIUI. I don't see that recursive destroys should be > anything special though. > > gm> Is it destroying old snapshots or creating new ones that > gm> causes this dead time? > > sortof seems like you should tell us this, not the other way > around. :) Seriously though, isn't that easy to test? And I'm curious > myself too. Yes, that's another thing I'd like to try. I'll just put a `sleep' in the script between the two actions to see if the dead time moves later in the day. -- -Gary Mills- -Unix Group- -Computer and Network Services- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
