diff --git a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/blob.rs b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/blob.rs
index 5f6ad3d2b8fa..1d737bfe5350 100644
--- a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/blob.rs
+++ b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/blob.rs
@@ -551,12 +551,7 @@ impl ObjectAccessTrait for BlobObjectAccess {
 
     async fn delete_objects(&self, stream: &mut (dyn Stream<Item = String> + Send + Unpin)) {
         // azure-sdk-for-rust does not yet support batched deletion of objects. So we issue
-        // object deletion requests in parallel. This means we open many TCP connections in
-        // parallel. Experimentally, we see that we get good performance with about half the
-        // default batch size that we use with S3 which is 1000. This also avoids running out
-        // of file desciptors when the ulimit is low.
-        let batch_size = *OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE / 2;
-
+        // object deletion requests in parallel.
         stream
             .map(|key| async move {
                 let op = self.access_stats.begin(ObjectAccessOpType::ObjectDelete);
@@ -591,7 +586,7 @@ impl ObjectAccessTrait for BlobObjectAccess {
                 .unwrap();
                 op.end(0);
             })
-            .buffered(batch_size)
+            .buffer_unordered(*OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE)
             .count()
             .await;
     }
diff --git a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/mod.rs b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/mod.rs
index 235683aa7b3c..efdc0c219b10 100644
--- a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/mod.rs
+++ b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/mod.rs
@@ -61,7 +61,12 @@ tunable! {
     static ref LONG_OPERATION_DURATION: Duration = Duration::from_secs(2);
     static ref XLONG_OPERATION_DURATION: Duration = Duration::from_secs(60);
     static ref PANIC_ON_XLONG_OPERATION: bool = false;
-    pub static ref OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE: usize = 1000;
+
+    // The default number of deletes to issue in parallel. Experimentally, we
+    // see that we get good performance with a batch size of 500. Since we open
+    // these many socket connections, we avoid a larger batch size to not run
+    // out of file desciptors when the ulimit is low.
+    pub static ref OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE: usize = 500;
     static ref PER_REQUEST_TIMEOUT: Duration = Duration::from_secs(2);
 }
 
diff --git a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/s3.rs b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/s3.rs
index fde63230e636..bf5ce65aef37 100644
--- a/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/s3.rs
+++ b/cmd/zfs_object_agent/zettaobject/src/object_access/s3.rs
@@ -5,7 +5,6 @@ use std::ops::Range;
 use std::pin::Pin;
 use std::time::Instant;
 
-use anyhow::anyhow;
 use anyhow::Context;
 use anyhow::Result;
 use async_stream::try_stream;
@@ -27,8 +26,7 @@ use rusoto_core::RusotoError;
 use rusoto_credential::ChainProvider;
 use rusoto_credential::InstanceMetadataProvider;
 use rusoto_credential::ProfileProvider;
-use rusoto_s3::Delete;
-use rusoto_s3::DeleteObjectsRequest;
+use rusoto_s3::DeleteObjectRequest;
 use rusoto_s3::GetBucketLifecycleConfigurationError;
 use rusoto_s3::GetBucketLifecycleConfigurationOutput;
 use rusoto_s3::GetBucketLifecycleConfigurationRequest;
@@ -36,7 +34,6 @@ use rusoto_s3::GetObjectError;
 use rusoto_s3::GetObjectRequest;
 use rusoto_s3::HeadObjectRequest;
 use rusoto_s3::ListObjectsV2Request;
-use rusoto_s3::ObjectIdentifier;
 use rusoto_s3::PutObjectError;
 use rusoto_s3::PutObjectRequest;
 use rusoto_s3::S3Client;
@@ -425,43 +422,27 @@ impl ObjectAccessTrait for S3ObjectAccess {
 
     // Note: Stream is of raw keys (with prefix)
     async fn delete_objects(&self, stream: &mut (dyn Stream<Item = String> + Send + Unpin)) {
-        // Note: we intentionally issue the delete calls serially because it
-        // doesn't seem to improve performance if we issue them in parallel
-        // (using StreamExt::for_each_concurrent()).
+        // GCP does not support S3's batched multi-delete API. So instead we issue
+        // object deletion requests in parallel. This performs better than the multi-delete API.
         stream
-            .chunks(*OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE)
-            .for_each(|chunk| async move {
-                let msg = format!("delete {} objects including {}", chunk.len(), &chunk[0]);
+            .map(|key| async move {
                 let op = self.access_stats.begin(ObjectAccessOpType::ObjectDelete);
-
+                let msg = format!("delete object {key}");
                 retry(&msg, None, || async {
-                    let req = DeleteObjectsRequest {
+                    let req = DeleteObjectRequest {
                         bucket: self.bucket.clone(),
-                        delete: Delete {
-                            objects: chunk
-                                .iter()
-                                .map(|key| ObjectIdentifier {
-                                    key: key.clone(),
-                                    ..Default::default()
-                                })
-                                .collect(),
-                            quiet: Some(true),
-                        },
+                        key: key.clone(),
                         ..Default::default()
                     };
-                    let output = self.client.delete_objects(req).await?;
-                    match output.errors {
-                        Some(errs) => match errs.get(0) {
-                            Some(e) => Err(OAError::Other(anyhow!("{:?}", e))),
-                            None => Ok(()),
-                        },
-                        None => Ok(()),
-                    }
+                    self.client.delete_object(req).await?;
+                    Ok(())
                 })
                 .await
                 .unwrap();
-                op.end_multiple(0, chunk.len() as u64);
+                op.end(0);
             })
+            .buffer_unordered(*OBJECT_DELETION_BATCH_SIZE)
+            .count()
             .await;
     }