On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 13:31:19 -0400 Eli V <eliventer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes using lvm cache is an option, and will give you actual caching of > the data files as well. However, in my experience it doesn't do much > caching of metadata so using it on large filesystems doesn't seem to > improve interactive usage much at all, i.e. ls -l, or btrfs filesystem > usage etc. Forgot to mention that in my case (on a large media server) I had great results with the described setup, especially noticeable in the mount time. Walking large directories in a GUI file manager was more responsive too. Not to mention mass deletion of snapshots. LVM cache seemed to know well to avoid polluting itself with infrequently accessed sequential-pattern bulk operations (i.e. copying or reading back the actual file data) and appeared to cache mostly the metadata as it should. For anyone considering this, give it a try, and give it at least a few days of normal usage to properly warm up. -- With respect, Roman
