Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*md\s+raid1\s+passes\s+barriers\,\s+but\s+xfs\s+doesn\'t\s+use\s+them\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*md\s+raid1\s+passes\s+barriers\,\s+but\s+xfs\s+doesn\'t\s+use\s+them\?\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:23:10 -0500; So md raid1 is happy to pass down any barrier writes that it sees, but this bit in xfs_mountfs_check_barriers() at mount time: if (mp->m_ddev_targp->bt_bdev->bd_disk->queue->ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00282.html (8,600 bytes)
2. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:31:11 +0200; Hi Eric! Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: Interesting. Since when? On my last test also ext3 disabled barries over device mapper / reiserfs[1]. well but I used it with LVM, maybe its di; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00301.html (8,484 bytes)
3. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:34:28 -0500; Which part? :) XFS has done the flag check for a very long time... This is xfs-specific; ext3 does not look for the queue ordered flag so won't have this problem on md raid1. but that's for device-ma; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00302.html (9,154 bytes)
4. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:25:17 +0200; Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: [...] Thanks for the info. My misunderstanding - I always thought and I thought I even read it somewhere - that md was a device mapper application. Ciao; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00303.html (9,124 bytes)
5. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:57:24 +1000; What we have is MD doing something strange and non-standard to implement barriers on RAID1. All other devices that support barriers define the barrier implementation as something other than QUEUE_ORD; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00310.html (10,934 bytes)
6. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:49:59 -0500; Hm, http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.402, putting back what was removed in http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.380 I g; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00313.html (10,078 bytes)
7. md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:23:10 -0500; So md raid1 is happy to pass down any barrier writes that it sees, but this bit in xfs_mountfs_check_barriers() at mount time: if (mp->m_ddev_targp->bt_bdev->bd_disk->queue->ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00742.html (8,600 bytes)
8. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:31:11 +0200; Hi Eric! Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: Interesting. Since when? On my last test also ext3 disabled barries over device mapper / reiserfs[1]. well but I used it with LVM, maybe its di; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00761.html (8,484 bytes)
9. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:34:28 -0500; Which part? :) XFS has done the flag check for a very long time... This is xfs-specific; ext3 does not look for the queue ordered flag so won't have this problem on md raid1. but that's for device-ma; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00762.html (9,154 bytes)
10. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:25:17 +0200; Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: [...] Thanks for the info. My misunderstanding - I always thought and I thought I even read it somewhere - that md was a device mapper application. Ciao; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00763.html (9,124 bytes)
11. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:57:24 +1000; What we have is MD doing something strange and non-standard to implement barriers on RAID1. All other devices that support barriers define the barrier implementation as something other than QUEUE_ORD; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00770.html (10,934 bytes)
12. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:49:59 -0500; Hm, http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.402, putting back what was removed in http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.380 I g; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg00773.html (10,078 bytes)
13. md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:23:10 -0500; So md raid1 is happy to pass down any barrier writes that it sees, but this bit in xfs_mountfs_check_barriers() at mount time: if (mp->m_ddev_targp->bt_bdev->bd_disk->queue->ordered == QUEUE_ORDERED_; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01202.html (8,600 bytes)
14. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 11:31:11 +0200; Hi Eric! Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: Interesting. Since when? On my last test also ext3 disabled barries over device mapper / reiserfs[1]. well but I used it with LVM, maybe its di; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01221.html (8,562 bytes)
15. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 08:34:28 -0500; Which part? :) XFS has done the flag check for a very long time... This is xfs-specific; ext3 does not look for the queue ordered flag so won't have this problem on md raid1. but that's for device-ma; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01222.html (9,259 bytes)
16. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Martin Steigerwald <Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:25:17 +0200; Am Dienstag 24 Juni 2008 schrieb Eric Sandeen: [...] Thanks for the info. My misunderstanding - I always thought and I thought I even read it somewhere - that md was a device mapper application. Ciao; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01223.html (9,259 bytes)
17. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 08:57:24 +1000; What we have is MD doing something strange and non-standard to implement barriers on RAID1. All other devices that support barriers define the barrier implementation as something other than QUEUE_ORD; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01230.html (10,982 bytes)
18. Re: md raid1 passes barriers, but xfs doesn't use them? (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:49:59 -0500; Hm, http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.402, putting back what was removed in http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/xfs-linux/linux-2.6/xfs_super.c#rev1.380 I g; /archives/xfs/2008-06/msg01233.html (10,248 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 18
Page: [1]