Hello Robert, Thursday, March 29, 2007, 11:37:48 AM, you wrote:
RM> Hello Matthew, RM> Thursday, March 29, 2007, 2:23:38 AM, you wrote: MA>> Robert Milkowski wrote: >>> Hello zfs-discuss, >>> >>> What will happen if I create a stripe pool of 3 disks, then create >>> somy symlinks and then overwrite one disk with 0s. >>> Ditto blocks should self-heal meta data so file systems will be >>> consistent. Now when it comes to symlinks... >>> >>> I was looking into a ZFS code and it looks like if symlink dst name is >>> less than 56 in size it will be stored in znode bonus buffer so it >>> will be protected by ditto blocks and such symlinks should survive >>> above scenario. However if symlink dst name is longer than 56 bytes it >>> will be stored in a data block so I guess I won't be able to read it, >>> right? MA>> That's correct. See also MA>> 6516171 zpl symlinks should have their own object type MA>> The new object type would be marked as metadata, and thus always be MA>> ditto'ed. RM> That's really interesting! Is someone currently working on it? Any RM> time frame? I would be really interested in this feature. RM> btw: what about corner cases when you have a file systems with 100's RM> million of symlinks and basically nothing more. If above would be RM> on by default (and I guess one couldn't switch it off) in such a RM> case fs will consume 2x space additional to lets say underlaying RM> mirror - not everyone would be pleased I guess... RM> ?? But metadata are compressed so probably it will consume less space... right? -- Best regards, Robert mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://milek.blogspot.com _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
