From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423393AbXDYWrO (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423392AbXDYWrO (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:14 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:23349 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422881AbXDYWrM (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:12 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.14,452,1170662400"; d="scan'208";a="79225067" Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:47:10 -0700 From: Valerie Henson To: Nikita Danilov Cc: David Lang , Amit Gud , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, riel@surriel.com, zab@zabbo.net, arjan@infradead.org, suparna@in.ibm.com, brandon@ifup.org, karunasagark@gmail.com, gud@ksu.edu Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] ChunkFS: fs fission for faster fsck Message-ID: <20070425224710.GB16129@nifty> References: <17965.60841.900376.524639@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <17966.23512.363955.141489@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <17967.15531.450627.972572@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <17967.15531.450627.972572@gargle.gargle.HOWL> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 03:34:03PM +0400, Nikita Danilov wrote: > > What is more important, design puts (as far as I can see) no upper limit > on the number of continuation inodes, and hence, even if _average_ fsck > time is greatly reduced, occasionally it can take more time than ext2 of > the same size. This is clearly unacceptable in many situations (HA, > etc.). Actually, there is an upper limit on the number of continuation inodes. Each file can have a maximum of one continuation inode per chunk. (This is why we need to support sparse files.) -VAL