Re: ext4 extends implementation question
That's not how extents work. What you are describing is a large block granularity, not extents-based allocation. There is no reason why the next allocation can't happen like this: [X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][X][X][X][X][A][A][A][A] [X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] That was pretty much my question, ty very much :) greets! aL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f1e6a84.4040...@qindel.com
Re: ext4 extends implementation question
Alberto Fuentes (alberto.fuen...@qindel.com on 2012-01-23 09:24 +0100): > On 01/10/2012 11:31 PM, Arno Schuring wrote: > > afuentes (alberto.fuen...@qindel.com on 2012-01-10 10:33 +0100): > >> What happens when you run out of space to allocate new extends in > >> ext4? is not allowed to write anymore even tho there are tons of > >> blocks available? > > > > I'm unsure what you mean. Extents is only an optimization strategy > > for allocating contiguous blocks. If there are no contiguous > > blocks, ext4 falls back to allocating singular blocks, but with > > normal usage patterns you should never get "tons of blocks > > available" with none of them contiguous. > > > > At least, that's how I understand it. Are you getting allocation > > failures with still plenty of space available? > > > > > > Regards, > > Arno > > > > > > This is how i see it > > [X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] > [X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] > [X][X][X][X][X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ] > [X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] > [X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] > [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] > [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] > > row= extends > [x]= used > [ ]= allocated > [-]= free That's not how extents work. What you are describing is a large block granularity, not extents-based allocation. There is no reason why the next allocation can't happen like this: [X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][X][X][X][X][A][A][A][A] [X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] Regards, Arno -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120123202148.3be5a...@viper.intra.loos.site
Re: ext4 extends implementation question
On 01/10/2012 11:31 PM, Arno Schuring wrote: afuentes (alberto.fuen...@qindel.com on 2012-01-10 10:33 +0100): What happens when you run out of space to allocate new extends in ext4? is not allowed to write anymore even tho there are tons of blocks available? I'm unsure what you mean. Extents is only an optimization strategy for allocating contiguous blocks. If there are no contiguous blocks, ext4 falls back to allocating singular blocks, but with normal usage patterns you should never get "tons of blocks available" with none of them contiguous. At least, that's how I understand it. Are you getting allocation failures with still plenty of space available? Regards, Arno This is how i see it [X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][X][X][X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [X][X][X][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ][ ] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] [-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-][-] row= extends [x]= used [ ]= allocated [-]= free after allocating two more extends in this scenario, what happens when it wants to write again? thanks! aL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4f1d194b.90...@qindel.com
Re: ext4 extends implementation question
afuentes (alberto.fuen...@qindel.com on 2012-01-10 10:33 +0100): > What happens when you run out of space to allocate new extends in > ext4? is not allowed to write anymore even tho there are tons of > blocks available? I'm unsure what you mean. Extents is only an optimization strategy for allocating contiguous blocks. If there are no contiguous blocks, ext4 falls back to allocating singular blocks, but with normal usage patterns you should never get "tons of blocks available" with none of them contiguous. At least, that's how I understand it. Are you getting allocation failures with still plenty of space available? Regards, Arno -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120110233113.6c2f8...@viper.intra.loos.site
ext4 extends implementation question
What happens when you run out of space to allocate new extends in ext4? is not allowed to write anymore even tho there are tons of blocks available? greets! aL -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1326187993.7861.1.ca...@qindelbox.int.qindel.com
