[Top] [All Lists]

Re: stable xfs

To: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: stable xfs
From: Ming Zhang <mingz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 09:10:31 -0400
Cc: Peter Grandi <pg_xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux XFS <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20060721032632.GA4138@tuatara.stupidest.org>
References: <17597.27469.834961.186850@base.ty.sabi.co.UK> <1153272044.2669.282.camel@localhost.localdomain> <17598.2129.999932.67127@base.ty.sabi.co.UK> <1153314670.2691.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060720061527.GB18135@tuatara.stupidest.org> <1153404502.2768.50.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060720161707.GB26748@tuatara.stupidest.org> <1153413481.2768.65.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060720190401.GA28836@tuatara.stupidest.org> <1153441178.2768.158.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060721032632.GA4138@tuatara.stupidest.org>
Reply-to: mingz@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 20:26 -0700, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2006 at 08:19:38PM -0400, Ming Zhang wrote:
> > what will be the side effect about this scattering?
> there is a desire in some cases to have files in the same directory
> close to each other on disk

then what is the benefit? because files under same dir can be accessed
with locality so put close will reduce disk head seek? other than this,
what else benefit?

> > one thing i worry about fsr is when do fsr and some power loss
> > events happen, can xfs handle this well?
> yes, fsr create a temporary file, unlinks it, copies the extents over,
> and does an atomic swap-extents-if-nothing-changed operation

so if i have 500GB file, will it be copied to another 500GB temp file?
sounds scary for me.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>