* Btrfs questions [not found] <1386615086.1044.YahooMailNeo@web180901.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> @ 2013-12-09 20:02 ` Cirillo Costantino 2013-12-09 20:08 ` Hugo Mills 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Cirillo Costantino @ 2013-12-09 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw) To: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions: * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a the B-Tree log on a separate device? * any plans to allow to have a file system metadata be placed on a separate device thanks lino ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Btrfs questions 2013-12-09 20:02 ` Btrfs questions Cirillo Costantino @ 2013-12-09 20:08 ` Hugo Mills [not found] ` <1386623127.31132.YahooMailNeo@web180903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Hugo Mills @ 2013-12-09 20:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Cirillo Costantino; +Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1290 bytes --] On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > > > i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions: > > * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre I don't recall seeing any Lustre-specific issues being reported here. Do you have any links to bug reports with this configuration? > * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs No: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Will_Btrfs_become_a_clustered_file_system > * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a the B-Tree log on a separate device? Not that I'm aware of, but it may come out of the work below. > * any plans to allow to have a file system metadata be placed on a separate device https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Device_IO_Priorities ... but it's not being worked on right now. Hugo. -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- Great oxymorons of the world, no. 5: Manifesto Promise --- [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <1386623127.31132.YahooMailNeo@web180903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>]
* Re: Btrfs questions [not found] ` <1386623127.31132.YahooMailNeo@web180903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> @ 2013-12-09 21:07 ` Cirillo Costantino 2013-12-10 0:38 ` Chris Samuel 2013-12-10 12:19 ` Hugo Mills 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Cirillo Costantino @ 2013-12-09 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Hugo Mills; +Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" resending in plain text ________________________________ From: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> To: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 1:05 PM Subject: Re: Btrfs questions thanks Hugo, the link you sent indicates that has been "submitted" but it is not in a kernel release... does it mean it could be in a 3.14 or 15 release? with the release of Haswell from Intel, persistent memory will be possible and cheap... portions of this memory could be made visible as block devices and mirrored for protection to a neighboring system for later replay in the event of a crash or power outage; how are such feature request be included in btrfs? lino ________________________________ From: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> To: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 12:08 PM Subject: Re: Btrfs questions On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > > > i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions: > > * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre I don't recall seeing any Lustre-specific issues being reported here. Do you have any links to bug reports with this configuration? > * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs No: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Will_Btrfs_become_a_clustered_file_system > * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a the B-Tree log on a separate device? Not that I'm aware of, but it may come out of the work below. > * any plans to allow to have a file system metadata be placed on a separate device https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Device_IO_Priorities ... but it's not being worked on right now. Hugo. -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- Great oxymorons of the world, no. 5: Manifesto Promise --- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Btrfs questions 2013-12-09 21:07 ` Cirillo Costantino @ 2013-12-10 0:38 ` Chris Samuel 2013-12-10 12:19 ` Hugo Mills 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Chris Samuel @ 2013-12-10 0:38 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-btrfs [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 500 bytes --] On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 01:07:11 PM Cirillo Costantino wrote: > with the release of Haswell from Intel, persistent memory will be possible > and cheap.. Haswell has transactional memory support: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_Synchronization_Extensions is that what you're thinking of? cheers, Chris -- Chris Samuel : http://www.csamuel.org/ : Melbourne, VIC This email may come with a PGP signature as a file. Do not panic. For more info see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenPGP [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 482 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: Btrfs questions 2013-12-09 21:07 ` Cirillo Costantino 2013-12-10 0:38 ` Chris Samuel @ 2013-12-10 12:19 ` Hugo Mills 2013-12-11 4:52 ` linoc 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Hugo Mills @ 2013-12-10 12:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Cirillo Costantino; +Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3764 bytes --] On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:07:11PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > resending in plain text > > > ________________________________ > From: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> > To: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> > Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 1:05 PM > Subject: Re: Btrfs questions > > > > thanks Hugo, > > the link you sent indicates that has been "submitted" but it is not in a kernel release... does it mean it could be in a 3.14 or 15 release? Unlikely. There were patches a couple of years ago, but they weren't accepted back then and would probably need some additional effort to make them work now -- even if the general approach was accepted (which I'm not sure it was, from memory). > with the release of Haswell from Intel, persistent memory will be > possible and cheap... portions of this memory could be made visible > as block devices and mirrored for protection to a neighboring system > for later replay in the event of a crash or power outage; how are > such feature request be included in btrfs? I think you're confusing two things (or possibly I am) -- transactional memory and persistent memory. Transactional memory allows for [potentially] more efficient algorithms to be used in concurrent systems, reducing the necessity for explicit locking -- that's unlikely to have much direct effect on btrfs, as I suspect it will largely be implemented in the kernel's lock primitives, and "ordinary" kernel code won't see much difference. Persistent memory simply retains its state over a power-off, so in that sense it looks something like a directly-attached/addressable block device, which have been around for ages in the embedded space (although the approaches used there, like XIP, may need modification to scale up appropriately). Both are useful things to have, but I don't think you're going to see any gigantic changes coming out of either, other than access times for persistent storage coming down as a result of persistent memory. Hugo. > lino > > > ________________________________ > From: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> > To: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> > Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 12:08 PM > Subject: Re: Btrfs questions > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > > > > > > i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions: > > > > * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre > > I don't recall seeing any Lustre-specific issues being reported > here. Do you have any links to bug reports with this configuration? > > > * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs > > No: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Will_Btrfs_become_a_clustered_file_system > > > * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a > the B-Tree log on a separate device? > > Not that I'm aware of, but it may come out of the work below. > > > * any plans to allow to have a file system metadata be placed on a separate device > > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Device_IO_Priorities > > ... but it's not being worked on right now. > > Hugo. > -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- There's many a slip 'twixt wicket-keeper and gully. --- [-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: Btrfs questions 2013-12-10 12:19 ` Hugo Mills @ 2013-12-11 4:52 ` linoc 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: linoc @ 2013-12-11 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Hugo Mills'; +Cc: linux-btrfs thanks -----Original Message----- From: Hugo Mills [mailto:hugo@carfax.org.uk] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 4:19 AM To: Cirillo Costantino Cc: "linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Btrfs questions On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 01:07:11PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > resending in plain text > > > ________________________________ > From: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> > To: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> > Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 1:05 PM > Subject: Re: Btrfs questions > > > > thanks Hugo, > > the link you sent indicates that has been "submitted" but it is not in > a kernel release... does it mean it could be in a 3.14 or 15 release? Unlikely. There were patches a couple of years ago, but they weren't accepted back then and would probably need some additional effort to make them work now -- even if the general approach was accepted (which I'm not sure it was, from memory). > with the release of Haswell from Intel, persistent memory will be > possible and cheap... portions of this memory could be made visible as > block devices and mirrored for protection to a neighboring system for > later replay in the event of a crash or power outage; how are such > feature request be included in btrfs? I think you're confusing two things (or possibly I am) -- transactional memory and persistent memory. Transactional memory allows for [potentially] more efficient algorithms to be used in concurrent systems, reducing the necessity for explicit locking -- that's unlikely to have much direct effect on btrfs, as I suspect it will largely be implemented in the kernel's lock primitives, and "ordinary" kernel code won't see much difference. Persistent memory simply retains its state over a power-off, so in that sense it looks something like a directly-attached/addressable block device, which have been around for ages in the embedded space (although the approaches used there, like XIP, may need modification to scale up appropriately). Both are useful things to have, but I don't think you're going to see any gigantic changes coming out of either, other than access times for persistent storage coming down as a result of persistent memory. Hugo. > lino > > > ________________________________ > From: Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk> > To: Cirillo Costantino <linoc@pacbell.net> > Cc: ""linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org"" <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org> > Sent: Monday, December 9, 2013 12:08 PM > Subject: Re: Btrfs questions > > > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:02:02PM -0800, Cirillo Costantino wrote: > > > > > > i am looking at using btrfs for a new project and i have a few questions: > > > > * i have heard that as it currently stands Btrfs has some issues > > to be used as a Lustre file system; is he aware of the issues and > > any plans to address these and integrate Btrfs in to Lustre > > I don't recall seeing any Lustre-specific issues being reported > here. Do you have any links to bug reports with this configuration? > > > * any plans to support native clustering on Btrfs > > No: > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/FAQ#Will_Btrfs_become_a_cluste > red_file_system > > > * on ZFS the ZIL is a separate device, any plans to implement a > the B-Tree log on a separate device? > > Not that I'm aware of, but it may come out of the work below. > > > * any plans to allow to have a file system metadata be placed on > > a separate device > > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Device_IO_Priori > ties > > ... but it's not being worked on right now. > > Hugo. > -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- There's many a slip 'twixt wicket-keeper and gully. --- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-12-11 4:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <1386615086.1044.YahooMailNeo@web180901.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
2013-12-09 20:02 ` Btrfs questions Cirillo Costantino
2013-12-09 20:08 ` Hugo Mills
[not found] ` <1386623127.31132.YahooMailNeo@web180903.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
2013-12-09 21:07 ` Cirillo Costantino
2013-12-10 0:38 ` Chris Samuel
2013-12-10 12:19 ` Hugo Mills
2013-12-11 4:52 ` linoc
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).