On 7 August 2010 00:24, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen
> wrote:
>> On 6 August 2010 20:23, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
>>> Do I have to change the partition ID flag of each partition?
>>> Currently is set to fd (Linux Raid autodetect) for us
On Saturday 07 of August 2010 00:24:08 Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen
>
> wrote:
> > On 6 August 2010 20:23, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
> >> Do I have to change the partition ID flag of each partition?
> >> Currently is set to fd (Linux Rai
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Sebastian 'gonX' Jensen
wrote:
> On 6 August 2010 20:23, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
>> Do I have to change the partition ID flag of each partition?
>> Currently is set to fd (Linux Raid autodetect) for used from mdadm
>> mkfs.btrfs supports that or needs to be 83
I just had a bug reported (assigned to me) in the Gentoo Linux distro
about a missing option ("-D") in btrfscrl. Looking into it, it
appears this feature is post the 0.19 tag of btrfs-progs. I would
like to get a more up-to-date btrfs-progs into Gentoo, but I would
like to follow the upstream ver
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 01:44:11PM -0500, Steven Pratt wrote:
> Here is the latest set of performance runs from the 2.6.35-rc5 tree.
> Included is a refresh of all the other filesystems with some changes
> for barriers on and off since this has been somewhat of a hot topic
> recently.
>
> New data
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 02:30:39PM +0300, Sami Liedes wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Oystein Viggen wrote:
> > IIRC, the limit on hard links is per directory. That is, if you put
> > each hard link into its own directory, there's basically no limit to the
> > amount of hard lin
Here is the latest set of performance runs from the 2.6.35-rc5 tree.
Included is a refresh of all the other filesystems with some changes for
barriers on and off since this has been somewhat of a hot topic recently.
New data linked in to the history graphs here:
http://btrfs.boxacle.net/reposi
On 6 August 2010 20:23, Leonidas Spyropoulos wrote:
> Do I have to change the partition ID flag of each partition?
> Currently is set to fd (Linux Raid autodetect) for used from mdadm
> mkfs.btrfs supports that or needs to be 83 (Linux) ?
FD is for mdraid integrated into the Linux kernel. I have
Do I have to change the partition ID flag of each partition?
Currently is set to fd (Linux Raid autodetect) for used from mdadm
mkfs.btrfs supports that or needs to be 83 (Linux) ?
On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Hubert Kario wrote:
> On Thursday 05 August 2010 16:15:22 Leonidas Spyropoulos wrot
On Viernes, 6 de Agosto de 2010 14:21:44 Ulrich Hecht escribió:
> ioctl(d, BTRFS_IOC_COMPR_SIZE, &size);
I wonder...it's not possible to fit this into FIEMAP somehow? I
though that FIEMAP has been designed with compressed data in
mind.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Monday 02 August 2010, Miao Xie wrote:
> I think you need use lock_extent()/unlock_extent() to enclose
> btrfs_get_extent(), but I didn't find lock_extent().
Yeah, I think that was missing in the original patch as well. Hope the
latest iteration is OK.
CU
Uli
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF
Returns a file's size on disk. Based on a patch by Chris Ball, improved
following suggestions by Chris Mason and Miao Xie.
Minimal example:
#include
#include
#include
#include
#define BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC 0x94
#define BTRFS_IOC_COMPR_SIZE _IOR(BTRFS_IOCTL_MAGIC, 21, uint64_t)
int main(in
Something is deeply wrong here. Raw block device access has a 1:1
mapping between logical and physical block numbers. They really should
never be non-contiguous.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More ma
On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 01:55:21PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 2010-08-05 16:51, Chris Mason wrote:
> > And then we need to setup a fio job file that hammers on all the ssds at
> > once. I'd have it use adio/dio and talk directly to the drives. I'd do
> > something like this for the fio job fil
On 2010-08-05 16:51, Chris Mason wrote:
> And then we need to setup a fio job file that hammers on all the ssds at
> once. I'd have it use adio/dio and talk directly to the drives. I'd do
> something like this for the fio job file, but Jens Axboe is cc'd and he
> might make another suggestion on
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 11:21:06PM +0200, Freek Dijkstra wrote:
> Chris Mason wrote:
>
> > Basically we have two different things to tune. First the block layer
> > and then btrfs.
>
>
> > And then we need to setup a fio job file that hammers on all the ssds at
> > once. I'd have it use adio/d
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 12:22:14AM +0200, Oystein Viggen wrote:
> IIRC, the limit on hard links is per directory. That is, if you put
> each hard link into its own directory, there's basically no limit to the
> amount of hard links you can make to one file.
Yes, that's always pointed out in these
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 15:37:45AM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 11:21:11AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 04:24:51PM -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> > Btrfs cannot handle having logically non-contiguous requests submitted.
>> > For
>> > example if y
Changes from V1 to V2:
- A device id for resizing should be specified
when executing 'maxsize' mount option.
In some cases, resizing a file system to the maximum device size is required.
When flashing a file system image to a block device,
the file system does not fit into the block device's siz
19 matches
Mail list logo
