From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au>
To: Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>
Cc: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] delayed disk block allocation
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2002 23:53:46 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3C83280A.A8CF7CC8@zip.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3C7F3B4A.41DB7754@zip.com.au> <E16hhuI-0000S6-00@starship.berlin> <20020304050450.GF353@matchmail.com>, <20020304050450.GF353@matchmail.com>; from mfedyk@matchmail.com on Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 09:04:50PM -0800 <20020303223103.J4188@lynx.adilger.int>
Andreas Dilger wrote:
>
> Actually, there are a whole bunch of performance issues with 1kB block
> ext2 filesystems.
I don't see any new problems with file tails here. They're catered for
OK. What I have not catered for is file holes. With the delalloc
patches, whole pages are always written out (except for at eof). So
if your file has lots of very small non-holes in it, these will become
larger non-holes.
If we're serious about 64k PAGE_CACHE_SIZE then this becomes more of
a problem. In the worst case, a file which used to consist of
4k block | (1 meg - 4k) hole | 4k block | (1 meg - 4k) hole | ...
will become:
64k block | (1 meg - 64k) hole | 64k block | (1 meg - 64k hole) | ...
Which is a *lot* more disk space. It'll happen right now, if the
file is written via mmap. But with no-buffer-head delayed allocate,
it'll happen with write(2) as well.
Is such space wastage on sparse files a showstopper? Maybe,
but probably not if there is always at least one filesystem
which handles this scenario well, because it _is_ a specialised
scenario.
-
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-04 7:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-01 8:26 [patch] delayed disk block allocation Andrew Morton
2002-03-04 2:08 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-03-04 3:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-04 7:27 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-04 5:04 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-03-04 5:31 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-03-04 5:40 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-03-04 6:14 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-03-04 5:41 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-04 6:18 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-03-04 15:02 ` Hans Reiser
2002-03-06 12:59 ` Pavel Machek
2002-03-04 7:53 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2002-03-04 8:06 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-03-04 8:34 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-04 7:20 ` Andrew Morton
2002-03-04 9:23 ` Daniel Phillips
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-03-04 14:54 rwhron
2002-03-04 15:10 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-03-07 12:06 Etienne Lorrain
2002-03-07 14:47 ` Steve Lord
2002-03-07 17:30 ` Mike Fedyk
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=3C83280A.A8CF7CC8@zip.com.au \
--to=akpm@zip.com.au \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillips@bonn-fries.net \
/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