On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:25 -0700, Zach Brown wrote:
> > Well, after some hints from Linus I've rebased these about 4 times now.
> > The new changesets are generally cleaner and are setup properly under
> > fs/btrfs.
>
> Can you publish these hints somewhere?
Step one was to have all the changes
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 18:58 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
I'm at 6.9 million files so far on a 500GB disk, and not surprisingly, I
get 155 files/sec ;) My hope is that we're spinning around due to bad
accounting on the reserved extents, and that Yan's latest patch set will
fi
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 18:58 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> >
> > I'm at 6.9 million files so far on a 500GB disk, and not surprisingly, I
> > get 155 files/sec ;) My hope is that we're spinning around due to bad
> > accounting on the reserved extents, and that Yan's latest patch set will
> > fix it.
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 17:10 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
Ok, I have that fs_mark test running here. How far did yours get before
it stopped?
-chris
I had gone (in heavy fsync mode) up to about 8 million files on a 1TB
s-ata disk:
17 8064000204
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 17:10 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> > Ok, I have that fs_mark test running here. How far did yours get before
> > it stopped?
> >
> > -chris
> >
> >
> I had gone (in heavy fsync mode) up to about 8 million files on a 1TB
> s-ata disk:
>
> 17 806400020480
> Well, after some hints from Linus I've rebased these about 4 times now.
> The new changesets are generally cleaner and are setup properly under
> fs/btrfs.
Can you publish these hints somewhere?
- z
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a mess
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 16:37 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:34 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 15:02 -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> As part of moving toward mainline, I've changed the Btrfs repositories
> over to git. So far I've only converted the unstable repositories
> (thanks to some help from David Woodhouse, who already had -git forms of
> thing
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 16:37 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:34 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> >>>
> Hel
Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:34 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Hello,
Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark command
./f
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 14:34 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark
> > > command
> > >
> > >
Josef Bacik wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
Hello,
Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark command
./fs_mark -d /mnt/test -s 20480 -D 64 -t 8 -F
Seems it hung and
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 02:37:02PM -0400, Chris Mason wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark
> > command
> >
> > ./fs_mark -d /mnt/test -s 20480 -D 64 -t 8 -F
> >
> > Seems it hung
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 13:56 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark command
>
> ./fs_mark -d /mnt/test -s 20480 -D 64 -t 8 -F
>
> Seems it hung and wasn't making any progress. He managed to get some sysrq-t,
> which is at htt
Hello,
Reporting this on behalf of ric. He was running the following fs_mark command
./fs_mark -d /mnt/test -s 20480 -D 64 -t 8 -F
Seems it hung and wasn't making any progress. He managed to get some sysrq-t,
which is at http://people.redhat.com/jwhiter/fs-mark-hang.txt towards the bottom
of t
Hello,
The new space balancing code needs a subvol to store the
temporary inode for data extent relocation.
Regards
Yan Zheng
---
diff -r 35eb00b579c4 mkfs.c
--- a/mkfs.cTue Sep 23 12:29:10 2008 -0400
+++ b/mkfs.cThu Sep 25 21:50:51 2008 +0800
@@ -229,6 +229,32 @@
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 16:31 +0100, Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:19 +0200, Kaspar Schleiser wrote:
> >> Hello everybody!
> >>
> >> This is my first post on the list, let me know if I'm n
Le 25 septembre 2008 à 16:31, Miguel Sousa Filipe a écrit:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't plan on adding support for non-persistent storage, but there
> > will be the idea of a fast frontend device that is basically a cache for
> > slower devic
Hi all,
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 2:10 PM, Chris Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:19 +0200, Kaspar Schleiser wrote:
>> Hello everybody!
>>
>> This is my first post on the list, let me know if I'm not following any
>> rules.
>>
>> What do you think about adding priorities f
On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:19 +0200, Kaspar Schleiser wrote:
> Hello everybody!
>
> This is my first post on the list, let me know if I'm not following any
> rules.
>
> What do you think about adding priorities for raid1 arrays?
>
> For example, always use /dev/ram0 (ramdisk) for reading/writing,
On Sep 25, 2008, at 2:19 AM, "Kaspar Schleiser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Hello everybody!
This is my first post on the list, let me know if I'm not following
any
rules.
What do you think about adding priorities for raid1 arrays?
For example, always use /dev/ram0 (ramdisk) for reading/w
Hello everybody!
This is my first post on the list, let me know if I'm not following any
rules.
What do you think about adding priorities for raid1 arrays?
For example, always use /dev/ram0 (ramdisk) for reading/writing, but
nonetheless write everything additionally on /dev/sda1. Restore to
/dev
Hello,
This patch contains various changes and fixes required for the
new space balancing code.
Regards
Yan Zheng
---
diff -r 96e213553923 ctree.c
--- a/ctree.c Thu Sep 25 16:02:40 2008 +0800
+++ b/ctree.c Thu Sep 25 16:05:16 2008 +0800
@@ -290,7 +290,6 @@
struct extent_b
Hello,
This patch adds shared reference cache support. The new space
balancing code plays with multiple subvols at the same time, So
the old per-subvol reference cache isn't fit for it.
Regards
Yan Zheng
---
diff -r 47aa0c51998a ctree.h
--- a/ctree.h Thu Sep 25 16:00:36 2008 +0800
+++ b/ctree.
Hello,
This patch updates the allocator for the new space balancing
code. It adds reserved extents accounting, changes a few ENOSPC
check, and makes btrfs_find_block_group not return NULL for
volumes that have been ebalanced.
Regards
Yan Zheng
---
diff -r 4b327f4fcee0 ctree.h
--- a/ctree.h Tue
25 matches
Mail list logo
