linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] mke2fs: enable bigalloc if -C is specified
@ 2012-05-31 16:52 Eric Sandeen
  2012-05-31 20:44 ` Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2012-05-31 16:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ext4 development

If -C is specified w/o -O bigalloc it has no effect and generates
no error.  If a cluster size is specified, that should imply
bigalloc.

Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
---

diff --git a/misc/mke2fs.c b/misc/mke2fs.c
index 7ec8cc2..d1944dc 100644
--- a/misc/mke2fs.c
+++ b/misc/mke2fs.c
@@ -1351,6 +1351,8 @@ profile_error:
 					optarg);
 				exit(1);
 			}
+			fs_param.s_feature_ro_compat |=
+					EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_BIGALLOC;
 			break;
 		case 'D':
 			direct_io = 1;



^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] mke2fs: enable bigalloc if -C is specified
  2012-05-31 16:52 [PATCH] mke2fs: enable bigalloc if -C is specified Eric Sandeen
@ 2012-05-31 20:44 ` Eric Sandeen
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Eric Sandeen @ 2012-05-31 20:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ext4 development

On 5/31/12 11:52 AM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> If -C is specified w/o -O bigalloc it has no effect and generates
> no error.  If a cluster size is specified, that should imply
> bigalloc.

Hm, so should -O bigalloc even be supported (or documented), or should
this always be done via -C XXXX?  It seems better to specify the size
rather than have some other -O option which picks an (arbitrary?) default
of 16x.

I'm also wondering what kind of guidance we should offer for choosing
cluster sizes - or if we should default to a cluster size given either
fs size, inode count, or combinations thereof.

I think the hard cold truth is that ext4 just isn't sufficiently scalable
at larger sizes without a larger cluster size, so I'm inclined to start
thinking about choosing some increasing cluster sizes as defaults, what
do you think?

And finally, is this stuff robust enough to start documenting in
the manpages yet?  I'm not sure the enospc problems have been worked
out yet...

-Eric

> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
> ---
> 
> diff --git a/misc/mke2fs.c b/misc/mke2fs.c
> index 7ec8cc2..d1944dc 100644
> --- a/misc/mke2fs.c
> +++ b/misc/mke2fs.c
> @@ -1351,6 +1351,8 @@ profile_error:
>  					optarg);
>  				exit(1);
>  			}
> +			fs_param.s_feature_ro_compat |=
> +					EXT4_FEATURE_RO_COMPAT_BIGALLOC;
>  			break;
>  		case 'D':
>  			direct_io = 1;
> 
> 


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2012-05-31 20:44 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2012-05-31 16:52 [PATCH] mke2fs: enable bigalloc if -C is specified Eric Sandeen
2012-05-31 20:44 ` Eric Sandeen

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).