From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74344C433EF for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-661-N8UNhr4yOQSFZYL_IYJREw-1; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 09:44:38 -0500 X-MC-Unique: N8UNhr4yOQSFZYL_IYJREw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF141833959; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com [10.30.29.100]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EEC81410F3B; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A3BC19305A0; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.10]) by mm-prod-listman-01.mail-001.prod.us-east-1.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C9851931BE9 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) id 90323401472; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast05.extmail.prod.ext.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.55.21]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78589492C14 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62B9A801E95 for ; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 14:44:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plutone.assyoma.it (host195-56-237-212.serverdedicati.aruba.it [212.237.56.195]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-388-Kyor3yV4O9m9Sx2wmjQrSA-1; Mon, 07 Mar 2022 09:44:30 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Kyor3yV4O9m9Sx2wmjQrSA-1 Received: from webmail.assyoma.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by plutone.assyoma.it (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BB656DCEF8EF; Mon, 7 Mar 2022 15:44:27 +0100 (CET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2022 15:44:27 +0100 From: Gionatan Danti To: LVM general discussion and development In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.4.13 Message-ID: X-Sender: g.danti@assyoma.it X-Mimecast-Impersonation-Protect: Policy=CLT - Impersonation Protection Definition; Similar Internal Domain=false; Similar Monitored External Domain=false; Custom External Domain=false; Mimecast External Domain=false; Newly Observed Domain=false; Internal User Name=false; Custom Display Name List=false; Reply-to Address Mismatch=false; Targeted Threat Dictionary=false; Mimecast Threat Dictionary=false; Custom Threat Dictionary=false X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.10 Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] Need inputs: Performance issues with LVM snapshots X-BeenThere: linux-lvm@redhat.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development Cc: "Gaikwad, Hemant" Errors-To: linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com Sender: "linux-lvm" X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.85 on 10.11.54.7 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=linux-lvm-bounces@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Il 2022-03-07 12:09 Gaikwad, Hemant ha scritto: > Hi, > > We have been looking at LVM as an option for long term backup using > the LVM snapshots. After looking at the various forums and also > looking at a few LVM defects, realized that LVM could be a very good > option for short term backup, but might result in performance issues > if the snapshots are retained for a long time. Also read we should > restrict the number of snapshots. We are thinking of keeping it to 3, > but do you think that could also be a performance bottleneck. A few > forum posts also suggest memory issues with using LVM snapshots. Can > you please help with some data on that too. Thanks in advance for > making our decision easier. Thanks > > Regards, Classical, non-thin LVM snapshots are only meant to be short-lived (just enough to take a backup), and the performance penalty you talk about does apply. Thin LVM snapshots, on the other side, command a much lower performance penalty and can be long-lived (ie: think about a rolling snapshot system). So if you need multiple, long-lived snapshots, I strongly suggest you to check lvmthin. Regards. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: g.danti@assyoma.it - info@assyoma.it GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8 _______________________________________________ linux-lvm mailing list linux-lvm@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-lvm read the LVM HOW-TO at http://tldp.org/HOWTO/LVM-HOWTO/