xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: fsr questions

To: utz lehmann <xfs@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: fsr questions
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 12:43:10 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Message from utz lehmann <xfs@s2y4n2c.de> of "Thu, 19 Apr 2001 22:05:39 +0200." <20010419220539.A23662@s2y4n2c.de>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi
> 
> I have 2 questions about fsr.
> 
> 1. Lilo is working on xfs (a least kernel images).
> Is there a way to prevent relocation of lilo files (kernel images, etc.) by
> fsr? I think this is _really_ nessesary.

This is a good point, at the moment I would say that not running fsr on the
root/boot filesystem is a good idea. In fact, there are only certain 
modes of operation which are going to create filesystems which need
defragmentation - and in general the system disks such as / /usr and /boot
will be fairly static in content and will not in general be in need of
any form of defragmentation.

> 
> 2. What happen if fsr is running in a low diskspace situation:
> An example: 5GB is free on the filesystem. fsr is defagmenting (coping) a
> 4GB file while other process will write alot of data. What happend if there
> is no space left? Will fsr stop and freeing the space or will the
> other processes get an out of space error?

Also a good point - I suspect the answer is that whoever asks for the last
space will get it. The good news is that fsr uses space preallocation, and
will quickly realize it cannot get space and free up what it consumed. The
bad news is that this means fsr will generally beat an application to getting
space when it comes to a race.

Obviously fsr is not a perfect solution - it was written for SGI customers
doing streaming media who needed to keep their files well layed out on
disk for performance reasons, not as an all singing all dancing defragmenter.

> 
> 
> utz

Steve



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