Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 30 September 2014 20:01, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 26 September 2014 20:34, Stefan Fuhrmann > wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: [...] >> Not being Mike, here is my opinion anyway: I'm +1 on your proposal. >> In fact, I had planned to call for exactly that vote at som

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

Stefan Sperling wrote on Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 19:30:06 +0200: > And I hope I won't be left alone when having to fix FSFSv7 corruption > should it ever occur in the wild ;-) I see the wink, but I'll answer seriously: if that's a concern, we might want to review the 'structure' file and code comment

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 05:45:48PM +0100, Julian Foad wrote: >   *** >   Who has reviewed this or intends to do so? And for what aspects -- overall >   design, compatibility/upgrade issues, threading issues, style, ...? >   *** I am not planning to review the FSFSv7 changes because the changes ar

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 26 September 2014 20:34, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: >> >> Mike, >> >> > At a minimum, the community needs to establish that this feature and its >> > side-effects are understood by more than just the one smart guy that >> > wrote >> > it and th

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

C. Michael Pilato wrote: > On 09/26/2014 12:34 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: >> Not being Mike, here is my opinion anyway: I'm +1 on your proposal. > > I'm late to the party, but this all sounds great. I need to decide for myself: should *I* volunteer to review it? As a member of our community of S

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 09/26/2014 12:34 PM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Ivan Zhakov > wrote: > > I think it would be fair to call a 'Consensus Approval' vote [1,2] > for leaving > the log-addressing feature in the trunk. In other words, it will >

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > Mike, > > > At a minimum, the community needs to establish that this feature and its > > side-effects are understood by more than just the one smart guy that > wrote > > it and the other smart guy who isn't a fan. Then, those who understand >

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

Mike, > At a minimum, the community needs to establish that this feature and its > side-effects are understood by more than just the one smart guy that wrote > it and the other smart guy who isn't a fan. Then, those who understand the > feature and its side-effects need to publicly weigh in on bo

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 09/18/2014 08:26 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > On 11 September 2014 18:03, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > Mike, > >> Ivan: As a reviewer of the code in question, there's really no way >> you could have established (for yourself) a legitimate objection >> about the "general quality" of the code without

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 11 September 2014 18:03, C. Michael Pilato wrote: Mike, > Ivan: As a reviewer of the code in question, there's really no way > you could have established (for yourself) a legitimate objection > about the "general quality" of the code without first spotting > some specific things that bothered

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

Thanks, Mike, for explaining this better than I could. As usual, I might add! -- Brane

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 09/10/2014 05:37 PM, Branko Čibej wrote: > > > > I have technical objections related to the general quality of the > > new code. The best way to find out more is to review this code by > > yourself! > > No. It's your veto and therefore the burden of evidence is on you. > "General quality of code

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 10 Sep 2014 16:40, "Ivan Zhakov" wrote: > > Brane, > > On 9 September 2014 19:15, Branko Čibej wrote: > > I'm not in the mood to split hairs right now (those who need to > > know why). I'll just say that I haven't had time to > > review the revprop cache branch, so obviously I can neither > >

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

I'm not in the mood to split hairs right now (those who need to know why). I'll just say that I haven't had time to review the revprop cache branch, so obviously I can neither approve nor veto it. The general approach was discussed at the hackathon in Sheffield, and I did agree with that. Ivan, si

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 6:24 PM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > > >> Moreover, we have discussed > >> this on Berlin 2013 hackathon [1]: > >> [[[ > >> stefan2 expressed that while he is confident that FSFSv7 is solid code, > >> it's also quite critical and could easily take a year or more to fully > >> stab

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

> (FWIW, maintaining the remove-log-addressing branch doesn't count, and > frankly I have a hard time imagining how that branch could be less buggy > than trunk, given that it's received far less attention and testing.) As you should know, current FSFS code on trunk is like this: if (log_addressing

Re: Implement major FSFS performance related changes in the experimental FSX format

On 26.08.2014 17:19, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > I propose to design and implement all major performance related > changes of the current FSFS format in the experimental FSX format. You do realise, I hope, that it's quite likely that FSX will end up having very little in common with FSFS. It might not ev