From: Mark Goodwin <markgw@sgi.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: rfc: kill ino64 mount option
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 10:46:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <486589E7.9010705@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080628000914.GE29319@disturbed>
Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 05:39:28PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Does anyone have objections to kill the ino64 mount option? It's purely
>> a debug tool to force inode numbers outside of the range representable
>> in 32bits and is quite invasive for something that could easily be
>> debugged by just having a large enough filesystem..
>
> It's the "large enough fs" that is the problem. XFSQA uses
> small partitions for the most part, and this allows testing
> of 64 bit inode numbers with a standard qa config.
>
> That being said, I don't really if it goes or stays...
Although ino64 has interoperability issues with 32bit apps, it does
have significant performance advantages over inode32 for some
storage topologies and workloads, i.e. it's generally desirable to
keep inodes near their data, but with large configs inode32 can't
always oblige. ino64 is not just a debug tool.
We have a design proposal known as "inode32+" that essentially removes
the direct mapping between inode number and disk offset. This will
provide all the layout and performance benefits of ino64 without the
interop issues. Until inode32+ is available, we need to keep ino64.
Cheers
--
Mark Goodwin markgw@sgi.com
Engineering Manager for XFS and PCP Phone: +61-3-99631937
SGI Australian Software Group Cell: +61-4-18969583
-------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-28 0:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-27 15:39 rfc: kill ino64 mount option Christoph Hellwig
2008-06-28 0:09 ` Dave Chinner
2008-06-28 0:46 ` Mark Goodwin [this message]
2008-06-28 4:31 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-06-28 15:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-06-28 19:52 ` Eric Sandeen
2008-07-01 8:07 ` Christoph Litauer
2008-07-01 14:12 ` Mark Goodwin
2008-07-01 14:45 ` Christoph Litauer
2008-06-28 15:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2008-06-29 23:13 ` Nathan Scott
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=486589E7.9010705@sgi.com \
--to=markgw@sgi.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--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