From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: Horrible ftruncate performance Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2003 18:05:27 +0400 Message-ID: <3F2D16A7.3060700@namesys.com> References: <20030710052931.GA17957@namesys.com> <200307111716.56823.Dieter.Nuetzel@hamburg.de> <20030711152431.GF17180@namesys.com> <200307111730.50601.m.c.p@gmx.net> <20030711154415.GI17180@namesys.com> <1057943343.13317.65.camel@tiny.suse.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <1057943343.13317.65.camel@tiny.suse.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed" To: Chris Mason Cc: Oleg Drokin , Marc-Christian Petersen , Dieter N?tzel , Szakacsits Szabolcs , reiserfs-list@namesys.com Chris Mason wrote: >On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 11:44, Oleg Drokin wrote: > > >>Hello! >> >>On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:34:12PM +0200, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote: >> >> >> >>>>Actually I did it already, as data-logging patches can be applied to >>>>2.4.22-pre3 (where this truncate patch was included). >>>> >>>> >>>>>Maybe it _IS_ time for this _AND_ all the other data-logging patches? >>>>>2.4.22-pre5? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>It's Chris turn. I thought it is good idea to test in -ac first, though >>>>(even taking into account that these patches are part of SuSE's stock >>>>kernels). >>>> >>>> >>>Well, I don't think that testing in -ac is necessary at all in this case. >>> >>> >>May be not. But it is still useful ;) >> >> >> >>>I am using WOLK on many production machines with ReiserFS mostly as Fileserver >>>(hundred of gigabytes) and proxy caches. >>> >>> >>I am using this code on my production server myself ;) >> >> >> >>>If someone would ask me: Go for 2.4 mainline inclusion w/o going via -ac! :) >>> >>> >>Chris should decide (and Marcelo should agree) (Actually Chris thought it is good >>idea to submit data-logging to Marcelo now, too). I have no objections. >>Also now, that quota v2 code is in place, even quota code can be included. >> >>Also it would be great to port this stuff to 2.5 (yes, I know Chris wants this to be in 2.4 first) >> >> > >Marcelo seems to like being really conservative on this point, and I >don't have a problem with Oleg's original idea to just do relocation in >2.4.22 and the full data logging in 2.4.23-pre4 (perhaps +quota now that >32 bit quota support is in there). > I would like to see it go in more quickly. I don't like significant lags between distro and mainline kernels in principle, and in reiserfs I would like to see the V3 code go mostly undisturbed after 2.4.22. V3 needs to become zero defect, and only a lack of changes other than bugfixes will make that happen. Dribbling out changes slowly is not conducive to being zero defect, and V3 only has a certain window of usability anyway before V4 obsoletes it. Let V3's niche be those who need zero defects, and let V4 be for those who want features and performance. >2.5 porting work has restarted at last, Oleg's really been helpful with >keeping the 2.4 stuff up to date. > >-chris > > > > > > -- Hans