On 11/28/2014 08:59 PM, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:05:48PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 11/27/2014 05:15 AM, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
This is a weakness of the current udev and asynchronous device hotplug
concept: there is no notion of bus enumeration in progress, so we
2014-11-29 2:25 GMT+01:00 Robert White :
>
> On 11/28/2014 09:05 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>>
>> For the disk autodetection, I still convinced that it is a "sane" default
>> to skip the lvm-snapshot
>
>
> No... please don't...
>
> Maybe offer an option to select between snapshots or no-snapsho
On 11/29/2014 02:25 AM, Robert White wrote:
> On 11/28/2014 09:05 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>> For the disk autodetection, I still convinced that it is a "sane"
>> default to skip the lvm-snapshot
>
> No... please don't...
>
> Maybe offer an option to select between snapshots or no-snapshots
Chris Murphy posted on Fri, 28 Nov 2014 00:10:40 -0700 as excerpted:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 2:08 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
>> So, umm... kinda late now, but read that "copy" as if it had a footnote
>> attached, saying "Yes, I know it's not actual copy, it's two views of
>> the sa
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 06:05:48PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On 11/27/2014 05:15 AM, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> > This is a weakness of the current udev and asynchronous device hotplug
> > concept: there is no notion of bus enumeration in progress, so we can be
> > trying to assemble multi-de
On 11/28/2014 09:05 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
For the disk autodetection, I still convinced that it is a "sane" default
to skip the lvm-snapshot
No... please don't...
Maybe offer an option to select between snapshots or no-snapshots but in
much the same way there is no _functional_ diffe
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Miao Xie wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2014 09:39:56 +0800, Miao Xie wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2014 10:02:23 -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 8:04 AM, Miao Xie
wrote:
The increase/decrease of bio counter is on the I/O path, so we
should
use io_sche
On 11/27/2014 05:15 AM, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 06:19:05PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
>> On 11/25/2014 11:21 PM, Zygo Blaxell wrote:
> However I still doesn't understood why you want btrfs-w/multiple disk
> over LVM ?
>>> I want to split a few disks into partit
On Thu 27-11-14 18:00:16, Ted Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:14:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > * change queue_io() to also call
> > moved += move_expired_inodes(&wb->b_dirty_time, &wb->b_io, time +
> > 24hours)
> > For this you need to tweak move_expired_inodes() to take pointer to
On 25 November 2014 at 23:14, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On 11/19/2014 6:59 PM, Duncan wrote:
>
>> The paper specifically mentioned that it wasn't necessarily the
>> more expensive devices that were the best, either, but the ones
>> that faired best did tend to have longer device-ready times. The
>> c
On 25 November 2014 at 22:34, Phillip Susi wrote:
> On 11/19/2014 7:05 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > I'm not a hard drive engineer, so I can't argue either point. But
> > consumer drives clearly do behave this way. On Linux, the kernel's
> > default 30 second command timer eventually results in what
On Thu 27-11-14 15:19:54, Ted Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 02:14:21PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > Looking into the code & your patch I'd prefer to do something like:
> > * add support for I_DIRTY_TIME in __mark_inode_dirty() - update_time will
> > call __mark_inode_dirty() with this flag i
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 05:51:27PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:47:35PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> > What I see critical is missing ./configure, because it's pretty ugly
> > to add hardcoded dependencies (e.g. libudev), there is also no checks
> > for another libs, Make
13 matches
Mail list logo
