From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n67Dswmm147654 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 08:54:58 -0500 Received: from mail.sandeen.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 7A98E9F5D26 for ; Tue, 7 Jul 2009 07:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id zYeFYhfUADuCdz84 for ; Tue, 07 Jul 2009 07:02:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4A5353D2.7010508@sandeen.net> Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:55:30 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfstests: add tests to check log size scaling References: <20090705194111.GA3834@infradead.org> <4A52CAD6.1070807@sandeen.net> <20090707104403.GA21747@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20090707104403.GA21747@infradead.org> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:11:02PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Any reason to do this on the scratch dir vs. the test dir? (Since >> scratch dir became optional, I figure stuff that can go on the test dev >> instead, probably should?) >> >> not a big deal, it looks fine otherwise. > > The test should work just fine using the test dir, and given that these > bits all cam from Dave I can't speak for his reason to use the scratch > dir. But given that even creating an empty 16TB filesystem uses up a > lot of space I'd rather have as much as possible free space available > instead of sharing it with an aged filesystem. Ok, it's fine by me as posted then, consider it reviewed. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs