Problem with mergefs

  • Hi,


    after upgrading to omv 6 i got a little problem with using mergefs. In omv 4 i used unionfs. Ok, so switched to mergefs cause there's no unionfs im omv 6, builded the pool with the same drives as in unionfs and everything seems to be fine.

    Later I realized that moving files over a smb-mount takes incredibly long, although the files are on the same disk.


    I could find out, that when i mount the same drive as single drive over smb, then moving of the same files (ca. 8GB) takes milliseconds.


    Is there an option in mergefs that has to been set, to solve this problem ? In unionfs i never noticed that problem.


    What i found in the net is a issue with the option: moveonenopc=true but I'm not sure if this is the problem.


    Does anyone else experienced something similar ?


    Thanks in advance.

    • Offizieller Beitrag

    i got a little problem with using mergefs. In omv 4 i used unionfs. Ok, so switched to mergefs cause there's no unionfs im omv 6, builded the pool with the same drives as in unionfs and everything seems to be fine.

    Unionfs is mergerfs as well.

    Is there an option in mergefs that has to been set, to solve this problem ? In unionfs i never noticed that problem.

    Since we don't know any of the options/setup of your pool or any details about your system, it is hard to say. I use the default options specified by the plugin and have no issues. Have you read the mergerfs readme (link in the plugin to this as well) to understand why you might be seeing slow performance? I could see performance dropping a little if your drives are full.

    omv 7.0.5-1 sandworm | 64 bit | 6.8 proxmox kernel

    plugins :: omvextrasorg 7.0 | kvm 7.0.13 | compose 7.1.4 | k8s 7.1.0-3 | cputemp 7.0.1 | mergerfs 7.0.4


    omv-extras.org plugins source code and issue tracker - github - changelogs


    Please try ctrl-shift-R and read this before posting a question.

    Please put your OMV system details in your signature.
    Please don't PM for support... Too many PMs!

  • Hi ryecoaaron,


    thanks so much for the immediate answer. I could identify the problem ... clearly layer 8. :D


    To long filenames and path .... just shorten them ... and everything is fine. Sorry for stealing your time. :whistling:


    But thx anyway for the quick answer.

  • Toni8767

    Hat das Label gelöst hinzugefügt.

Jetzt mitmachen!

Sie haben noch kein Benutzerkonto auf unserer Seite? Registrieren Sie sich kostenlos und nehmen Sie an unserer Community teil!