From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] TileFS - a proposal for scalable integrity checking
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 23:19:50 +0400
Message-ID: <17986.7894.913448.214067@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <20070428220522.GN11166@waste.org>
	<20070429232349.GA19937@thunk.org>
	<20070430014042.GL11115@waste.org>
	<20070509075638.GJ12859@nifty>
	<17985.44441.177720.982683@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
	<20070509185631.GA18778@nifty>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
To: Valerie Henson <val_henson@linux.intel.com>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.clusterfs.com ([206.168.112.78]:45309 "EHLO
	mail.clusterfs.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751003AbXEITTt (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 9 May 2007 15:19:49 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20070509185631.GA18778@nifty>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Valerie Henson writes:

[...]

 > 
 > You're right about needing to read the equivalent data-structure - for
 > other reasons, each continuation inode will need an easily accessible
 > list of byte ranges covered by that inode. (Sounds like, hey,
 > extents!) The important part is that you don't have go walk all the

I see. I was under impression that idea was to use indirect blocks
themselves as that data-structure, e.g., block number 0 to mark holes,
block number 1 to mark "block not in this continuation", and all other
block numbers for real blocks.

 > indirect blocks or check your bitmap.
 > 
 > -VAL

Nikita.