From: Sanidhya Solanki <jpage.lkml@gmail.com>
To: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>,
clm@fb.com, jbacik@fb.com, quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com
Cc: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] BTRFS: Adds an option to select RAID Stripe size
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 06:52:07 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160102065207.4eec760a@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151229180643.GD4227@twin.jikos.cz>
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 19:06:44 +0100
David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz> wrote:
> In theory this is possible with current on-disk data structures. The
> stripe length is property of btrfs_chunk and changing it should be
> possible the same way we do other raid transformations. The
> implementation might be tricky at some places, but basically boils
> down to the "read-" and "write-" stripe size. Reading chunks would
> always respect the stored size, writing new data would use eg. the
> superblock->stripesize or other value provided by the user.
I was having misgivings about the conversion project, but after
re-reading this part, I will try and get a patch in by Wednesday.
I still have my reservations about the following two parts:
- Checksumming: I have no experience with how the CRC implementation
would deal with the changed blocksizes. Would the checksum be
different just because the superblock size has been changed? This
would make confirming if the transformation was successful much more
difficult. Another way to deal with this would be ti read the data
instead and compare it directly, instead of using checksums.
- Performance: Should it have a higher throughput by using larger data
sizes (which may reduce performance in scenarios such as databases and
video editing) or by having multiple transformations in parallel on
smaller data blocks. I am not sure if you can implement things such
as OpenMP in kernel space. Or spawn multiple kworkers in parallel to
deal with multiple streams of data.
I am not too worried about dealing with crashes, as we can just
implement something like a table that contains the addresses currently
undergoing changes (which may further reduce throughput, but make it
more space) or do it by using a serial transformation, which ensures a
block was committed to storage before proceeding to the next
transformation.
Essentially a time vs. CPU usage vs. Memory usage trade-off.
Please chime in with your thoughts, developers and administrators.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-02 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-28 12:24 [PATCH] BTRFS: Adds an option to select RAID Stripe size Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-28 22:19 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-28 20:38 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 1:21 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-28 21:43 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 3:42 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-29 0:03 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 4:26 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-29 1:31 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 6:03 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-29 2:23 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 15:32 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-29 16:44 ` Duncan
2015-12-30 2:56 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-29 18:06 ` David Sterba
2015-12-30 20:00 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2015-12-30 21:02 ` Duncan
2015-12-30 21:13 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2016-01-02 11:52 ` Sanidhya Solanki [this message]
2016-01-03 1:37 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-01-03 2:26 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2016-01-05 10:44 ` David Sterba
2016-01-05 18:48 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2016-01-10 3:11 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2016-01-11 1:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-01-11 15:43 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2016-01-11 11:49 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2016-01-11 15:57 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
2016-01-11 16:01 ` Hugo Mills
2016-01-12 12:23 ` Austin S. Hemmelgarn
2016-01-12 12:07 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 13:39 ` David Sterba
2015-12-29 11:15 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-29 17:06 ` David Sterba
2015-12-29 21:32 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-30 6:39 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-30 11:59 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-12-30 9:54 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-30 14:10 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-12-30 11:15 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-30 15:58 ` David Sterba
2015-12-30 21:19 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2015-12-30 16:17 ` David Sterba
2015-12-30 21:21 ` Sanidhya Solanki
2016-01-05 10:33 ` David Sterba
2015-12-31 0:46 ` Qu Wenruo
2016-01-05 10:16 ` David Sterba
2015-12-30 19:48 ` Christoph Anton Mitterer
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=20160102065207.4eec760a@gmail.com \
--to=jpage.lkml@gmail.com \
--cc=calestyo@scientia.net \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).