From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: "Ted Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@redhat.com>,
Jens Axboe <jaxboe@fusionio.com>,
"James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership
Subject: Re: I/O topology fixes for big physical block size
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 12:07:02 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CA4C3B6.9000104@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100930163047.GA4098@thunk.org>
On 09/30/2010 11:30 AM, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 04:36:42PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> Ok, then it sounds like mkfs.ext4's refusal to make fs blocksize less
>> than device physical sectorsize without -F is broken, and that should
>> be removed. I'd say issue a warning in the case but if there's a 16k
>> physical device maybe there's no point in warning either?
>
> If the device physical sectorsize is that big, should we perhaps use
> that as a hint to align writes to that blocks aligned with that
> physical sectorsize? Right now we use the optimal I/O size, but if
> the optimal I/O size is not specified and the physical sectorsize is,
I can't keep track of all the parameters, is it ever true that optimal
I/O size isn't specified?
> say, 16k or 32k, maybe we should use to calculate for
> s_raid_stripe_width?
Perhaps, though really ext4 still doesn't do -that- much with the value,
anyway...
-Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-30 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1285605664-27027-1-git-send-email-martin.petersen@oracle.com>
[not found] ` <4CA0CC38.5010804@fusionio.com>
[not found] ` <yq1pqvzcddq.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
[not found] ` <4CA118FF.1080100@fusionio.com>
[not found] ` <yq18w2mddav.fsf@sermon.lab.mkp.net>
2010-09-27 23:15 ` I/O topology fixes for big physical block size Mike Snitzer
2010-09-28 4:30 ` Jens Axboe
2010-09-28 5:20 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-28 14:15 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-09-28 20:57 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-09-28 21:24 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-09-28 21:36 ` Eric Sandeen
2010-09-30 16:30 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-09-30 17:07 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2010-09-30 17:33 ` Mike Snitzer
2010-10-01 14:24 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-01 22:19 ` Martin K. Petersen
2010-10-02 2:31 ` Ted Ts'o
2010-10-02 3:03 ` Daniel Taylor
2010-10-04 19:49 ` Martin K. Petersen
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=4CA4C3B6.9000104@redhat.com \
--to=sandeen@redhat.com \
--cc=jaxboe@fusionio.com \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=snitzer@redhat.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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