On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:13:18AM +0800, Wang Shilong wrote:
> I am commenting not because of Qu's patch, of course, Qu and Mark
> Fasheh
> Do a really good thing for Btrfs contributions.
>
> Just my two cents!
>
> 1) I think Currently, we should really focus on Btrfs stability,
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 01:54:26PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:36:59PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:52:11PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > > Taking your history with qgroups out of this btw, my opinion does not
> > > change.
> > >
> > > With r
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 08:14:10AM -0400, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2016-05-12 16:54, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> >Now ask yourself the question - would you accept a write cache which is
> >expensive to fill and would only have a hit rate of less than 5%?
> In-band deduplication is a feature that i
On 05/13/2016 08:14 PM, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:
On 2016-05-12 16:54, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:36:59PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:52:11PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
Taking your history with qgroups out of this btw, my opinion does not
change.
On 2016-05-12 16:54, Mark Fasheh wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:36:59PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:52:11PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
Taking your history with qgroups out of this btw, my opinion does not
change.
With respect to in-memory only dedupe, it is my hones
Mark Fasheh posted on Thu, 12 May 2016 13:54:26 -0700 as excerpted:
> For example, my 'large' duperemove test involves about 750 gigabytes of
> general purpose data - quite literally /home off my workstation.
>
> After the run I'm usually seeing between 65-75 gigabytes saved for a
> total of only
On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 11:44:40AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Although maybe out of your expectation, inband de-dedupe did exposed some
> existing bugs we didn't ever found before.
> And they are all reproducible without inband dedupe.
>
> Some examples:
> [...]
> 3) Slow backref walk.
>Already
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:36:59PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> I like the in-memory dedup backend. It's lightweight, only a heuristic,
> does not need any IO or persistent storage. OTOH I consider it a subpart
> of the in-band deduplication that does all the persistency etc. So I
> treat the ioctl
Wang Shilong wrote on 2016/05/13 11:13 +0800:
Hello Guys,
I am commenting not because of Qu's patch, of course, Qu and Mark Fasheh
Do a really good thing for Btrfs contributions.
Just my two cents!
1) I think Currently, we should really focus on Btrfs stability, there
are sti
Hello Guys,
I am commenting not because of Qu's patch, of course, Qu and Mark Fasheh
Do a really good thing for Btrfs contributions.
Just my two cents!
1) I think Currently, we should really focus on Btrfs stability, there
are still many
bugs hidden inside Btrfs, please See Filip
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 07:36:59PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:52:11PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> > Taking your history with qgroups out of this btw, my opinion does not
> > change.
> >
> > With respect to in-memory only dedupe, it is my honest opinion that such a
> >
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 07:52:11PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> Taking your history with qgroups out of this btw, my opinion does not
> change.
>
> With respect to in-memory only dedupe, it is my honest opinion that such a
> limited feature is not worth the extra maintenance work. In particular
> t
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:11:19PM -0700, Mark Fasheh wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> > Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
> >
> > As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your
> > ideas about the inband dedupe.
> >
> > We are addressing the ENOS
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
> about the inband dedupe.
For me it's still in the process of review.
> We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, and we
> believe the final
Solve the hard problems first (dedupe with a disk backend, make in-memory
perform), then come asking for inclusion of your feature. Again, this I
would say about the patches regardless of whose name is on them.
--Mark
David has already agreed on the idea to merge in-memory backend f
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:40:51AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> Chris Mason wrote on 2016/05/10 20:37 -0400:
> >On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
> >>
> >>As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
> >>about th
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:03:24AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
>
> Mark Fasheh wrote on 2016/05/10 15:11 -0700:
> >On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
> >>
> >>As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your
> >>ideas about th
On 2016/05/11 10:40, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Chris Mason wrote on 2016/05/10 20:37 -0400:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
about the inband dedupe.
We are addressing the EN
Chris Mason wrote on 2016/05/10 20:37 -0400:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
about the inband dedupe.
We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, a
Mark Fasheh wrote on 2016/05/10 15:11 -0700:
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your
ideas about the inband dedupe.
We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, a
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
>
> As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
> about the inband dedupe.
>
> We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, and we believe
> the final fix patch wo
On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 03:19:52PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
>
> As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your
> ideas about the inband dedupe.
>
> We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, and we
> believe the final fix patch wo
Hi, Chris, Josef and David,
As merge window for v4.7 is coming, it would be good to hear your ideas
about the inband dedupe.
We are addressing the ENOSPC problem which Josef pointed out, and we
believe the final fix patch would come out at the beginning of the merge
window.(Next week)
If
23 matches
Mail list logo
