[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH, needs a new owner] XFS Alloc Policies

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, needs a new owner] XFS Alloc Policies
From: Mark Goodwin <goodwinos@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:08:17 +1100
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7V3Fq+oAqR2quso0/i0Z40fCjjMBaq8WRRtNlPqnveU=; b=fVLDpQ22ymaSRfp+hBD31XdvEICUjc3S6N8ZDnkdbsNa3AzngrthXQ/p2BsiOf/mf4 K0bF59Xvsl9R3P+ANL4eF+uRHKjbrB2dYDSRa+SUCVY6L9cNIb/TEyOdXOEb6bCixGlW S8+O5t1ZIcKToLcF2tXbXKb2FT5l+BQkvd7+s=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=hzGkVzp7z5q6q4ZWCm7BlkcmPrswn3iUbKUFjILfCUyxklZm61Ml/ANWpEPa4D5Qqd Nbs4qT7UIHhelMnChylWW2BGX2QIDb0+XNB9k8Man4+B3uza0WxiDAo4mGsHzWS+5sJA A1edSVHDFsHzg5yFKec6APG+BeqnOTfXIRpWc=
In-reply-to: <20090212185853.GA23056@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <49939F90.20905@xxxxxxx> <20090212185853.GA23056@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090105)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 03:03:28PM +1100, Mark Goodwin wrote:
Series of patches, originally by Dave Chinner. This series
of 18 patches is unfinished and needs a new owner - the
feature partially implements pluggable allocation policies
for XFS.

A fairly substantial architectural write-up with community
debate/feedback on the design would be appropriate before
embarking on this. Tarball attached for the following:

Thanks for posting these.  I'm pretty sure these patches will
get some sort of makeover before beeing ready, but they are
an important building block for some of the interesting work
we're planning to do (like the multi device work or ssd-aware
allocators), so there will be some action on it.

Yep. It would be good if there was some kind of write-up on
those plans since the feature will be fairly intrusive. I assume
it's been a back-of-the-envelope-with-beer kind of discussion
so far ..

-- Mark

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