From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: inode data not getting included in commits? Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 09:12:55 -0500 Message-ID: <1229695975.6270.12.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <3d0408630812181726g7b1be6ey787ff0e6105cfa80@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Yan Zheng , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Sage Weil Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-ID: On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 21:21 -0800, Sage Weil wrote: > On Fri, 19 Dec 2008, Yan Zheng wrote: > > > I noticed some data and metadata getting out of sync on disk, despite > > > wrapping my writes with btrfs transactions. After digging into it a bit, > > > it appears to be a larger problem with inode size/data getting written > > > during a regular commit. > > > [...] > > > > This is the desired behaviour of data=ordered. Btrfs transaction commit > > don't flush data, and metadata wont get updated until data IO complete. > > > > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/869/match=new+data+ordered+code > > Ah, right, so it is. > > I think what I'm looking for then is a mount mode to get the old behavior, > such that each commit flushes previously written data. Probably a call to > btrfs_wait_ordered_extents() in btrfs_commit_transaction(), or something > along those lines... Could you describe the end goal a bit? I'm happy to make modes where it'll do what you need. -chris