From: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xattr atomicy
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:52:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131213195246.GK1935@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131213115644.GA28551@infradead.org>
Hey Christoph,
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 03:56:44AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On the nfsv4 list it was recently discussed how atomic / transaction
> xattr updates are. It turns out none of that seems documented on the
> syscall level, but for XFS we have an odd inconsistancy in that attr
> updates generally are atomic and logged, except when we go out to
> remote attributes in xfs_attr_rmtval_set, in which case attr updates
> are no logged, and we do synchronous writes instead.
>
> Besides the weird semantic difference that is impossible to explain to
> users performance will also generally be bad with a synchronous buffer
> write. Is there any good reason to not log the buffer for the remote
> attributes? Given that attribute are limited to 64kB it's not like
> the value is larger than large directory blocks that we already
> support.
Looks like it's just because we're concerned about the size of the transaction:
1221 STATIC int
1222 xfs_attr_node_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args)
1223 {
...
1359 /*
1360 * If there was an out-of-line value, allocate the blocks we
1361 * identified for its storage and copy the value. This is done
1362 * after we create the attribute so that we don't overflow the
1363 * maximum size of a transaction and/or hit a deadlock.
1364 */
1365 if (args->rmtblkno > 0) {
1366 error = xfs_attr_rmtval_set(args);
1367 if (error)
1368 return(error);
1369 }
I'm not clear on what the deadlock might have been.
-Ben
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-13 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-13 11:56 xattr atomicy Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-13 19:52 ` Ben Myers [this message]
2013-12-13 21:51 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-16 15:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=20131213195246.GK1935@sgi.com \
--to=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/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.