From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Austin S Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@gmail.com>,
"Holger Hoffstätte" <holger.hoffstaette@googlemail.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Automatic balance after mkfs?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:44:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150626134409.GT726@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <558259F3.8060505@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:41:07PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>> Yes. It's an artefact of the way that mkfs works. If you run a
> >>> balance on those chunks, they'll go away. (btrfs balance start
> >>> -dusage=0 -musage=0 /mountpoint)
> >>
> >> Since I had to explain this very same thing to a new btrfs-using friend
> >> just yesterday I wondered if it might not make sense for mkfs to issue
> >> a general balance after creating the fs? It should be simple enough
> >> (just issue the balance ioctl?) and not have any negative side effects.
> >>
> >> Just doing such a post-mkfs cleanup automatically would certainly
> >> reduce the number of times we have to explain the this. :)
> >>
> >> Any reasons why we couldn't/shouldn't do this?
> >>
> > Following the same line of thinking, is there any reason we couldn't
> > just rewrite mkfs to get rid of this legacy behavior?
The 'single' blockgroups on multidevice filesystem are considered a bug
in mkfs, an annoying and long running one.
> Compared to the more complex auto balance, rewrite mkfs is a much better
> idea.
Balance is a workaround besides that it requires mouting.
> The original mkfs seems easy for developers, but bad for users.
I'd argue that mkfs is primarily for users.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-26 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-16 13:13 Automatic balance after mkfs? Holger Hoffstätte
2015-06-16 13:21 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-06-18 5:41 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-06-26 13:44 ` David Sterba [this message]
2015-06-16 13:24 ` Hugo Mills
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=20150626134409.GT726@twin.jikos.cz \
--to=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=holger.hoffstaette@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox