Linux Btrfs filesystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: qgroup: Fix the long existing regression of btrfs/153
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 15:22:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200702132217.GL27795@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200702001434.7745-1-wqu@suse.com>

On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 08:14:31AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Since commit c6887cd11149 ("Btrfs: don't do nocow check unless we have to"),
> btrfs/153 always fails with early EDQUOT.
> 
> This is caused by the fact that:
> - We always reserved data space for even NODATACOW buffered write
>   This is mostly to improve performance, and not pratical to revert.
> 
> - Btrfs qgroup data and meta reserved space share the same limit
>   So it's not ensured to return EDQUOT just for that data reservation,
>   metadata reservation can also get EDQUOT, means we can't go the same
>   solution as that commit.
> 
> This patchset will solve it by doing extra qgroup space flushing when
> EDQUOT is hit.
> 
> This is a little like what we do in ticketing space reservation system,
> but since there are very limited ways for qgroup to reclaim space,
> currently it's still handled in qgroup realm, not reusing the ticketing
> system yet.
> 
> By this, this patch could solve the btrfs/153 problem, while still keep
> btrfs qgroup space usage under the limit.
> 
> The only cost is, when we're near qgroup limit, we will cause more dirty
> inodes flush and transaction commit, much like what we do when the
> metadata space is near exhausted.
> So the cost should be still acceptable.

This sounds like a reasonable solution to me. Making the behaviour
closer to ticket reservations would probably make it easier to switch
some day.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-07-02 13:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-02  0:14 [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: qgroup: Fix the long existing regression of btrfs/153 Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02  0:14 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: Introduce extent_changeset_revert() for qgroup Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 13:40   ` Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 13:50     ` Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 13:56       ` Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 14:07         ` Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02  0:14 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: qgroup: Try to flush qgroup space when we get -EDQUOT Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 13:43   ` Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 13:54     ` Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 13:57       ` Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 14:19         ` Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 14:58           ` Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 23:36             ` Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02  0:14 ` [PATCH 3/3] Revert "btrfs: qgroup: Commit transaction in advance to reduce early EDQUOT" Qu Wenruo
2020-07-02 13:11   ` David Sterba
2020-07-02 13:22 ` David Sterba [this message]
2020-07-02 13:28 ` [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: qgroup: Fix the long existing regression of btrfs/153 Josef Bacik
2020-07-02 13:41   ` David Sterba
2020-07-02 13:44     ` Josef Bacik

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=20200702132217.GL27795@twin.jikos.cz \
    --to=dsterba@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wqu@suse.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