25.06.2010 22:58, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 06/24/2010 06:06 PM, Daniel Taylor wrote:
[]
>>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Daniel Taylor
>>> wrote:
>>>
Just an FYI reminder. The original test (2K files) is utterly
pathological for disk drives with 4K physical sectors, such as
>>>
On 06/24/2010 06:06 PM, Daniel Taylor wrote:
-Original Message-
From: mikefe...@gmail.com [mailto:mikefe...@gmail.com] On
Behalf Of Mike Fedyk
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 9:51 PM
To: Daniel Taylor
Cc: Daniel J Blueman; Mat; LKML;
linux-fsde...@vger.kernel.org; Chris Mason; Ric W
Hi, everyone!
mkfs.btrfs just does the following check for sectorsize when we use it to make
a btrfs.
sectorsize = max(sectorsize, (u32)getpagesize());
Does that mean we can set sectorsize to any number greater than pagesize?
If not, I think we should do more check for sectorsize in mkfs.btrfs.
"Daniel Taylor" writes:
>
> As long as no object smaller than the disk block size is ever
> flushed to media, and all flushed objects are aligned to the disk
> blocks, there should be no real performance hit from that.
The question is just how large such a block needs to be.
Traditionally some RA
