From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mr003msb.fastweb.it ([85.18.95.87]:46823 "EHLO mr003msb.fastweb.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752355AbdIIX0p (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Sep 2017 19:26:45 -0400 Subject: Re: XFS and sector size on thin volumes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 01:26:42 +0200 From: Gionatan Danti In-Reply-To: <20170909231215.GK17782@dastard> References: <20170909231215.GK17782@dastard> Message-ID: <0c59ba403f83e571d695a716ccad5d0a@assyoma.it> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Dave Chinner Cc: linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org Il 10-09-2017 01:12 Dave Chinner ha scritto: > > Probably not. And, worse, you open up the possibility of torn > "single sector" writes if the underlying device isn't a native 4k > sector device. Good catch, I was not thinking on how sectsize=4K could interact with non-4K disks. However, if using only 4K disks below the thin volumes/ZVOLs, should I manually set sectsize=4K? Or, again, I should stick with the default and stop worring? Thanks. -- Danti Gionatan Supporto Tecnico Assyoma S.r.l. - www.assyoma.it email: g.danti@assyoma.it - info@assyoma.it GPG public key ID: FF5F32A8