From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Lehmann Subject: Re: SMR drive test 2; 128GB partition; no obvious corruption, much more sane behaviour, weird overprovisioning Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 01:39:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20150923233937.GE3463@schmorp.de> References: <20150808205003.GA6546@schmorp.de> <20150810203106.GA4575@jaegeuk-mac02> <20150920235901.GA7017@schmorp.de> <20150921081748.GA5637@schmorp.de> <20150921081937.GA5718@schmorp.de> <20150921095806.GA6809@schmorp.de> <20150923011239.GA32520@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> <20150923041523.GB4946@schmorp.de> <20150923060037.GA6667@schmorp.de> <20150923220823.GE36564@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Zetda-0001X8-Oe for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 23 Sep 2015 23:39:46 +0000 Received: from mail.nethype.de ([5.9.56.24]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1ZetdZ-0005q7-GW for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 23 Sep 2015 23:39:46 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150923220823.GE36564@jaegeuk-mac02.mot.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net To: Jaegeuk Kim Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 03:08:23PM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > root@shag:/sys/fs/f2fs/dm-1# df -H /mnt > > Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on > > /dev/mapper/vg_test-test 138G 137G 803k 100% /mnt > > Could you please share /sys/kernel/debug/f2fs/status? Uh, sorry, I planned to, but forgot, probably because I thought the result was so good it didn't need any checking :) > So, I'm convinced that your inital test set "-o1 -s128", which was an unlucky > trial. :) hmm... since the point is to simulate a full 8TB partition, having large overprovision/reserved space AND large section size might actually have been a good test, as it would simulate the TB case better, which would also have larger overprovisioning and the larger section size. In the end, I might settle with -s64, and currently do tests with -s90. I was just scared that overprovisioning might turn out ot be extremely large with 8TB. I have since then dropped -o from all my mkfs.f2fs invocations, seeing that the resulting filesystem does not actually have 5% overprovisioning. > Subject: [PATCH] mkfs.f2fs: fix wrong ovp space calculation on large section Hmm, the latest change in git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jaegeuk/f2fs-tools.git is from august 10 - do I need to select a branch (I am not good with git)? -- The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net ----==-- _ generation ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Monitor Your Dynamic Infrastructure at Any Scale With Datadog! Get real-time metrics from all of your servers, apps and tools in one place. SourceForge users - Click here to start your Free Trial of Datadog now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=241902991&iu=/4140