From: Ted Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Tao Ma <tm@tao.ma>
Cc: Andreas Dilger <adilger@whamcloud.com>,
linux-ext4 development <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
Alex Zhuravlev <bzzz@whamcloud.com>,
"hao.bigrat@gmail.com" <hao.bigrat@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bigalloc and max file size
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 16:00:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111031200053.GI16825@thunk.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4EAE780D.3090005@tao.ma>
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 06:27:25PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote:
> In the new bigalloc case if chunk size=64k, and with the linux-3.0
> source, every file will be allocated a chunk, but they aren't contiguous
> if we only write the 1st 4k bytes. In this case, writeback and the block
> layer below can't merge all the requests sent by ext4. And in our test
> case, the total io will be around 20000. While with the cluster size, we
> have to zero the whole cluster. From the upper point of view. we have to
> write more bytes. But from the block layer, the write is contiguous and
> it can merge them to be a big one. In our test, it will only do around
> 2000 ios. So it helps the test case.
This is test case then where there are lot of sub-64k files, and so
the system administrator would be ill-advised to use a 64k bigalloc
cluster size in the first place. So don't really consider that a
strong argument; in fact, if the block device is a SSD or a
thin-provisioned device with an allocation size smaller than the
cluster size, the behaviour you describe would in fact be detrimental,
not a benefit.
In the case of a hard drive where seeks are expensive relative to
small writes, this is something which we could do (zero out the whole
cluster) with the current bigalloc file system format. I could
imagine trying to turn this on automatically with a hueristic, but
since we can't know the underlying allocation size of a
thin-provisioned block device, that would be tricky at best...
Regards,
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-31 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-26 23:36 bigalloc and max file size Andreas Dilger
2011-10-27 1:05 ` Tao Ma
2011-10-27 6:35 ` Theodore Tso
[not found] ` <EB03FF23-73BC-4FDC-B991-5EB3FEEB8DAE@whamcloud.com>
2011-10-27 11:48 ` Theodore Tso
[not found] ` <97D9C5CC-0F22-4BC7-BDFA-7781D33CA7F3@whamcloud.com>
2011-10-27 21:42 ` Theodore Tso
2011-10-28 3:31 ` Tao Ma
2011-10-31 10:15 ` Theodore Tso
2011-10-31 10:27 ` Tao Ma
2011-10-31 18:53 ` Sunil Mushran
2011-10-31 19:09 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-10-31 20:00 ` Ted Ts'o [this message]
2011-11-01 4:06 ` Tao Ma
2011-10-30 5:37 ` Coly Li
2011-10-30 19:49 ` Theodore Tso
2011-10-31 9:35 ` Coly Li
2011-10-31 10:22 ` Theodore Tso
2011-10-31 16:08 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-10-31 16:22 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-10-31 17:39 ` Coly Li
2011-10-31 19:38 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-11-01 1:10 ` Coly Li
2011-11-01 11:47 ` Theodore Tso
2011-11-01 12:22 ` Coly Li
2011-10-31 16:34 ` Andreas Dilger
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20111031200053.GI16825@thunk.org \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=adilger@whamcloud.com \
--cc=bzzz@whamcloud.com \
--cc=hao.bigrat@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tm@tao.ma \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.