xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: stable xfs

To: Ming Zhang <mingz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: stable xfs
From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 20:26:32 -0700
Cc: Peter Grandi <pg_xfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Linux XFS <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1153441178.2768.158.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <17597.27469.834961.186850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153272044.2669.282.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <17598.2129.999932.67127@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153314670.2691.14.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060720061527.GB18135@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153404502.2768.50.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060720161707.GB26748@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153413481.2768.65.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060720190401.GA28836@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1153441178.2768.158.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
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

> 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


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