From: "Benoît Canet" <benoit.canet@irqsave.net>
To: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Cc: benoit.canet@irqsave.net, famz@redhat.com, jcody@redhat.com,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mreitz@redhat.com,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] qcow2 journalling draft
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:55:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130904095523.GC5054@irqsave.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130904093950.GB3562@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com>
> > I'm not sure if multiple journals will work in practice. Doesn't this
> > re-introduce the need to order update steps and flush between them?
>
> This is a question for Benoît, who made this requirement. I asked him
> the same a while ago and apparently his explanation made some sense to
> me, or I would have remembered that I don't want it. ;-)
The reason behind the multiple journal requirement is that if a block get
created and deleted in a cyclic way it can generate cyclic insertions/deletions
journal entries.
The journal could easilly be filled if this pathological corner case happen.
When it happen the dedup code repack the journal by writting only the non
redundant information into a new journal and then use the new one.
It would not be easy to do so if non dedup journal entries are present in the
journal hence the multiple journal requirement.
The deduplication also need two journals because when the first one is frozen it
take some time to write the hash table to disk and anyway new entries must be
stored somewhere at the same time. The code cannot block.
> It might have something to do with the fact that deduplication uses the
> journal more as a kind of cache for hash values that can be dropped and
> rebuilt after a crash.
For dedupe the journal is more a "resume after exit" tool.
Best regards
Benoît
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-09-04 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-09-03 13:45 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] qcow2 journalling draft Kevin Wolf
2013-09-03 14:43 ` Benoît Canet
2013-09-04 8:03 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-09-04 9:37 ` Benoît Canet
2013-09-04 9:39 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-04 9:55 ` Benoît Canet [this message]
2013-09-05 9:24 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-09-05 15:26 ` Benoît Canet
2013-09-06 7:27 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-15 18:23 ` Benoît Canet
2013-09-05 9:21 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-09-05 11:18 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-05 14:55 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-09-05 15:20 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-05 15:56 ` Eric Blake
2013-09-06 9:20 ` Fam Zheng
2013-09-06 9:57 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-06 10:02 ` Fam Zheng
2013-09-04 8:32 ` Max Reitz
2013-09-04 10:12 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-05 9:35 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-09-05 11:50 ` Kevin Wolf
2013-09-05 12:08 ` Benoît Canet
2013-09-06 9:59 ` Fam Zheng
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=20130904095523.GC5054@irqsave.net \
--to=benoit.canet@irqsave.net \
--cc=famz@redhat.com \
--cc=jcody@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=mreitz@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).