This new function is just used to fill the file extent with given
numbers.
This is mainly used for later cleanup of duplicated file extent setup
codes in inode.c, but also centralized the safety check for later
expansion.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
[[CORE FEATURES]]
The main design concept is the following:
1) Controllable memory usage
2) No guarantee to dedup every duplication.
3) No on-disk format change or new format
4)
When we do backref walking, we search firstly in queued delayed refs
and then the on-disk backrefs, but we parse differently for shared
references, for delayed refs we also add 'ref-root' while for on-disk
backrefs we don't, this can prevent us from merging refs indexed
by the same bytenr and
Chris Mason wrote on 2015/07/23 21:57 -0400:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 08:29:05AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
[ deadlock with the 070 patches ]
Thanks Chris
We will investigate it with highest priority.
Thanks,
Qu
Thanks! I'm doing a few more runs to make sure the lockup is new with
these
Oh, there seems to be something wrong with the internal mail server.
The codes and patches can also get from github, as only the first 4
patches are successfully sent...
https://github.com/adam900710/linux/tree/dedup
Thanks,
Qu
Qu Wenruo wrote on 2015/07/28 16:30 +0800:
Although Liu Bo has
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
[[CORE FEATURES]]
The main design concept is the following:
1) Controllable memory usage
2) No guarantee to dedup
From: Zhao Lei zhao...@cn.fujitsu.com
Anthony Plack anth...@plack.net reported a output bug in maillist:
title: btrfs-progs SCRUB reporting aborted but still running - minor
btrfs scrub status report it was aborted but still runs to completion.
# btrfs scrub status /mnt/data
scrub status
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:03:44AM +0100, Filipe David Manana wrote:
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com wrote:
When we do backref walking, we search firstly in queued delayed refs
and then the on-disk backrefs, but we parse differently for shared
references, for
Use btrfs_fill_file_extent() function to replace the hand-coded codes.
As it has better check and takes less effort to maintain.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/file-item.c | 20
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 38 ++
Add basic internal add/remove/search functions for btrfs_dedup.
They are all internal use only as caller shouldn't call this low level
functions
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/dedup.c | 169 ++-
1 file changed,
Add basic data structures and their init/free functions for later inband
dedup implment.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/Makefile | 2 +-
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 5
fs/btrfs/dedup.c | 88 ++
fs/btrfs/dedup.h
Add basic data structures and their init/free functions for later inband
dedup implment.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/Makefile | 2 +-
fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 5
fs/btrfs/dedup.c | 88 ++
fs/btrfs/dedup.h
Use btrfs_fill_file_extent() function to replace the hand-coded codes.
As it has better check and takes less effort to maintain.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/file-item.c | 20
fs/btrfs/inode.c | 38 ++
Add basic internal add/remove/search functions for btrfs_dedup.
They are all internal use only as caller shouldn't call this low level
functions
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/dedup.c | 169 ++-
1 file changed,
This new function is just used to fill the file extent with given
numbers.
This is mainly used for later cleanup of duplicated file extent setup
codes in inode.c, but also centralized the safety check for later
expansion.
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
fs/btrfs/ctree.h
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
[[CORE FEATURES]]
The main design concept is the following:
1) Controllable memory usage
2) No guarantee to dedup every duplication.
3) No on-disk format change or new format
4)
Doing some fast-paced benchmarking of lots of raid levels, some in a
kvm, some via RDMA access over InfiniBand using different procotols,
etc.
Was shocked to see horrible raid0 performance in one of the tests.
Looked back through the logs and found:
(Note that I typo'ed -d raid**e**0
=
$
On Wed, Jul 29, 2015 at 09:47:12AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
First, thanks David for the review.
David Sterba wrote on 2015/07/28 16:50 +0200:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is
Liu Bo wrote on 2015/07/28 17:52 +0800:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
[[CORE FEATURES]]
The main design concept is the following:
1) Controllable
In parse_profile() function, in error handling route, it output error
message but forgot to exit(1), causing even profile is not valid, it
will just fallback to single.
Reported-by: James Harvey jamespharve...@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
mkfs.c | 1 +
1 file
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:50:21PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
What's the reason to start another implementation?
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 4:09 PM, Alejandro Recarey a...@recarey.org wrote:
# ./btrfs device delete /dev/sda /storage
ERROR: error removing the device '/dev/sda' - No space left on device
# uname -a
Linux nerd-server 3.13.0-48-generic \
I can't even begin to tell you how much has
First, thanks David for the review.
David Sterba wrote on 2015/07/28 16:50 +0200:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
What's the reason to start
On 07/28/2015 05:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:36:45AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
Right, I don't think we need to do that though. If you look at the flags
usage, it's all over the map. Some use test/set_bit, some set it just by
OR'ing the mask. There's no reason we
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:16 PM, james harvey jamespharve...@gmail.com wrote:
Doing some fast-paced benchmarking of lots of raid levels, some in a
kvm, some via RDMA access over InfiniBand using different procotols,
etc.
Was shocked to see horrible raid0 performance in one of the tests.
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 04:30:36PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Although Liu Bo has already submitted a V10 version of his deduplication
implement, here is another implement for it.
What's the reason to start another implementation?
[[CORE FEATURES]]
The main design concept is the following:
1)
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:36:45AM -0600, Jens Axboe wrote:
Right, I don't think we need to do that though. If you look at the flags
usage, it's all over the map. Some use test/set_bit, some set it just by
OR'ing the mask. There's no reason we can't make this work without relying
on
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 08:34:50AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Yes, you were against the automatic use of backup root or especially
iteration all metadata space to find the latest tree root.
I'll try to add a new option like --full-scan to enable the automatic
search of all metadata space.
Chris Murphy wrote on 2015/07/28 21:14 -0600:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 8:16 PM, james harvey jamespharve...@gmail.com wrote:
Doing some fast-paced benchmarking of lots of raid levels, some in a
kvm, some via RDMA access over InfiniBand using different procotols,
etc.
Was shocked to see
Using BTRFS on a very large filesystem, and as we put and more data to
it, the time it takes to mount it grew to, presently, about 30 minutes.
Is there something wrong with the filesystem? Is there a way to bring
this time down?
...
Here is a snippet from dmesg, showing how long it takes to
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 06:52:07PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:22:56AM +0200, Brendan Hide wrote:
It does not, I apparently forgot that you could use single to
concatenate multiple devices. I'll fix that in v2.
Thanks for reviewing!
Late to the party.
Hi all,
I setup a btrfs filesystem on 3 disks with raid 1. Somehow, a small
portion (2GiB) got used as RAID0. At the time, no amount of running
balance -dconvert raid1 would change it so I left it as is.
Lately /dev/sda is starting to show SMART errors and general
issues. So I added 2 other
32 matches
Mail list logo
