Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 28 Jul 2021 15:14:31 -0400
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To:     Neal Gompa <ngompa13@gmail.com>
Cc:     NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>, Wang Yugui <wangyugui@e16-tech.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>,
        Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
        Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 00/11] expose btrfs subvols in mount table correctly
Message-ID: <20210728191431.GA3152@fieldses.org>
References: <162742539595.32498.13687924366155737575.stgit@noble.brown>
 <20210728125819.6E52.409509F4@e16-tech.com>
 <20210728140431.D704.409509F4@e16-tech.com>
 <162745567084.21659.16797059962461187633@noble.neil.brown.name>
 <CAEg-Je8Pqbw0tTw6NWkAcD=+zGStOJR0J-409mXuZ1vmb6dZsA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAEg-Je8Pqbw0tTw6NWkAcD=+zGStOJR0J-409mXuZ1vmb6dZsA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 08:26:12AM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> I think this is behavior people generally expect, but I wonder what
> the consequences of this would be with huge numbers of subvolumes. If
> there are hundreds or thousands of them (which is quite possible on
> SUSE systems, for example, with its auto-snapshotting regime), this
> would be a mess, wouldn't it?

I'm surprised that btrfs is special here.  Doesn't anyone have thousands
of lvm snapshots?  Or is it that they do but they're not normally
mounted?

--b.