xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfs: don't let the dirty time inodes get more than a day

To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] vfs: don't let the dirty time inodes get more than a day stale
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 23:45:08 -0500
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-btrfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=thunk.org; s=ef5046eb; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date; bh=SkO8X9pzctBAoyWQaGxRi3XrMLT2lSX8WyvfJWDC9Bs=; b=nwFrFCUmUBFqfEDWZZCjh1ZhHEer4XFgrMNlkqRKGNtj1+7ca9OFST82pmv9UsNl4qxUKnnqRd+FPlGANhKBWq63Q6I/3EmV+uagb5uZSJ68Qn7sxD+hk+CgMz7r7oP7BkjeX8K7h5QuHsOjX6OyoQd4c8lzgWXB0haF0r35pm4=;
In-reply-to: <20141125015332.GE27262@dastard>
References: <1416599964-21892-1-git-send-email-tytso@xxxxxxx> <1416599964-21892-4-git-send-email-tytso@xxxxxxx> <20141125015332.GE27262@dastard>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 12:53:32PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 02:59:23PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > Guarantee that the on-disk timestamps will be no more than 24 hours
> > stale.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx>
> 
> If we put these inodes on the dirty inode list with at writeback
> time of 24 hours, this is completely unnecessary.

What do you mean by "a writeback time of 24 hours"?  Do you mean
creating a new field in the inode which specifies when the writeback
should happen?  I still worry about the dirty inode list getting
somewhat long large in the strictatime && lazytime case, and the inode
bloat nazi's coming after us for adding a new field to struct inode
structure.

Or do you mean trying to abuse the dirtied_when field in some way?

                                   - Ted

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