From: Ben Myers <bpm@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: xattr atomicy
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 13:52:46 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131213195246.GK1935@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131213115644.GA28551@infradead.org>
Hey Christoph,
On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 03:56:44AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On the nfsv4 list it was recently discussed how atomic / transaction
> xattr updates are. It turns out none of that seems documented on the
> syscall level, but for XFS we have an odd inconsistancy in that attr
> updates generally are atomic and logged, except when we go out to
> remote attributes in xfs_attr_rmtval_set, in which case attr updates
> are no logged, and we do synchronous writes instead.
>
> Besides the weird semantic difference that is impossible to explain to
> users performance will also generally be bad with a synchronous buffer
> write. Is there any good reason to not log the buffer for the remote
> attributes? Given that attribute are limited to 64kB it's not like
> the value is larger than large directory blocks that we already
> support.
Looks like it's just because we're concerned about the size of the transaction:
1221 STATIC int
1222 xfs_attr_node_addname(xfs_da_args_t *args)
1223 {
...
1359 /*
1360 * If there was an out-of-line value, allocate the blocks we
1361 * identified for its storage and copy the value. This is done
1362 * after we create the attribute so that we don't overflow the
1363 * maximum size of a transaction and/or hit a deadlock.
1364 */
1365 if (args->rmtblkno > 0) {
1366 error = xfs_attr_rmtval_set(args);
1367 if (error)
1368 return(error);
1369 }
I'm not clear on what the deadlock might have been.
-Ben
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-13 19:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-13 11:56 xattr atomicy Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-13 19:52 ` Ben Myers [this message]
2013-12-13 21:51 ` Dave Chinner
2013-12-16 15:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131213195246.GK1935@sgi.com \
--to=bpm@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox