From: Kazuya Mio <k-mio@sx.jp.nec.com>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11 RESEND] libe2p: Add new function get_fragment_score()
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 20:26:25 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E007FE1.8000704@sx.jp.nec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110617031814.GA31884@thunk.org>
2011/06/17 12:18, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> It perhaps might be useful to also articulate what are the goals of
> this metric. Is just just to decide which files should be
> defragmented, and which should be left alone? Or do you want to be
> able to compare which file is "worse off"?
I decided to implement a fragmentation score for the two purposes:
one is for filefrag that outputs the score to decide which files should be
defragmented, and the other is for e4defrag that compares two files'
fragmentation to prevent the worse fragmentation.
> I can imagine two files that have a score of 100%, but one is much
> worse off than the other. Does that matter? It may or might not,
> depending how you plan to use the fragmentation score, both now and in
> the future. So it might be good to explicitly declare what are the
> goals for this metrics, and its planned use cases.
Certainly, the same fragmentation score doesn't always mean the same
fragmentation. Just as Andreas said, "fragments per MB" is a good idea. It's
easy to understand, and other filesystem also would be able to use it without
change. Moreover, there is no worry about what threshold we use to
the application.
What do you think about this idea?
Regards,
Kazuya Mio
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-21 11:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-15 6:33 [PATCH 01/11 RESEND] libe2p: Add new function get_fragment_score() Kazuya Mio
2011-06-16 3:06 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-06-17 3:01 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-17 3:18 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-06-17 14:20 ` Eric Sandeen
2011-06-18 7:19 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-06-18 17:00 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-06-18 17:15 ` Andreas Dilger
2011-06-21 11:28 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-23 11:16 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-06-23 11:27 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-06-24 8:28 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-26 2:16 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-06-28 10:21 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-28 13:53 ` Greg Freemyer
2011-07-01 8:34 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-07-07 10:40 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-21 11:26 ` Kazuya Mio [this message]
2011-06-21 13:56 ` Ted Ts'o
2011-06-23 8:00 ` Kazuya Mio
2011-06-19 19:55 ` Greg Freemyer
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=4E007FE1.8000704@sx.jp.nec.com \
--to=k-mio@sx.jp.nec.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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.