On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:40:51AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > > > Chris Mason wrote on 2016/05/10 20:37 -0400: > >On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote: > >>Hi, Chris, Josef and David, > >> > >>As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas > >>about the inband dedupe. > >> > >>We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, and we believe > >>the final fix patch would come out at the beginning of the merge > >>window.(Next week) > >> > >> > >>If it's fine, would you please consider to merge the in-memory backend > >>patchset for v4.7 as an experimental feature? > >> > >> > >>Most of the patch won't be changed from v10 patchset, only ENOSPC fix will > >>be updated, and ioctl patchset will introduce a new Kconfig option of "btrfs > >>experimental features" for inband dedupe. > >>(With explain about unstable ioctl/on-disk format for experimental features) > >> > >> > >>If you are all OK to merge inband dedupe in-memory backend, I'll prepare the > >>new v11 patchset for this merge. > > > >We have to balance the part where we really want the features to come > >in, and we want to lower the load on you to continue porting them. But, > >I really do agree that we need strong test suites included with every > >major feature like this. > > > >-chris > > > > > That's fine. > > We're running all generic and btrfs test case with dedupe enabled, > by modifying xfstest to call "btrfs dedeup enable" just after mount, > to ensure dedupe won't corrupt any existing test case.
As Satoru mentioned, this is something that everybody needs to be able to run. I would also like to see some basic analysis done on write-heavy workloads. I think it's fair to understand what sort of impact this will have on the write path. --Mark -- Mark Fasheh -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html