From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Chinner Subject: Re: vm/fs meetup details Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 20:01:10 +1000 Message-ID: <20070706100110.GD12413810@sgi.com> References: <20070705040138.GG32240@wotan.suse.de> <468D303E.4040902@redhat.com> <137D15F6-EABE-4EC1-A3AF-DAB0A22CF4E3@oracle.com> <20070705212757.GB12413810@sgi.com> <468D6569.6050606@redhat.com> <20070706022651.GG14215@wotan.suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Rik van Riel , David Chinner , Zach Brown , Anton Altaparmakov , Suparna Bhattacharya , Christoph Hellwig , Hugh Dickins , Jared Hulbert , Chris Mason , "Martin J. Bligh" , Trond Myklebust , Neil Brown , Joern Engel , Miklos Szeredi , Mingming Cao , Linux Memory Management List , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Evgeniy Polyakov , Steven Whitehouse , Dave McCracken , Peter Zijlstra To: Nick Piggin Return-path: Received: from netops-testserver-3-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.28]:57290 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755300AbXGFKCg (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Jul 2007 06:02:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070706022651.GG14215@wotan.suse.de> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 06, 2007 at 04:26:51AM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote: > On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 05:40:57PM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > > David Chinner wrote: > > >On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 01:40:08PM -0700, Zach Brown wrote: > > >>>- repair driven design, we know what it is (Val told us), but > > >>> how does it apply to the things we are currently working on? > > >>> should we do more of it? > > >>I'm sure Chris and I could talk about the design elements in btrfs > > >>that should aid repair if folks are interested in hearing about > > >>them. We'd keep the hand-waving to a minimum :). > > > > > >And I'm sure I could provide a counterpoint by talking about > > >the techniques we've used improving XFS repair speed and > > >scalability without needing to change any on disk formats.... > > > > Sounds like that could be an interesting discussion. > > > > Especially when trying to answer questions like: > > > > "At what filesystem size will the mitigating fixes no > > longer be enough?" > > > > and > > > > "When will people start using filesystems THAT big?" :) > > Keep in mind that the way to get the most out of this meeting > is for the fs people to have topics of the form "we'd really > like to do X, can we get some help from the VM"? Or vice versa > from vm people. *nod* But, surprisingly enough, the above work is relevent to this forum because of two things: - we've had to move to direct I/O and user space caching to work around deficiencies in kernel block device caching under memory pressure.... - we've exploited techniques that XFS supports but the VM does not. i.e. priority tagging of cached metadata so that less important metadata is tossed first (e.g. toss tree leaves before nodes and nodes before roots) when under memory pressure. > That said, we can talk about whatever interests the group on > the day. And that could definitely include issues common to > different filesystems. Sure ;) Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group