On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Zygo Blaxell
<ce3g8...@umail.furryterror.org> wrote:

>> And how common is RMW for metadata operations?
> RMW in metadata is the norm.  It happens on nearly all commits--the only
> exception seems to be when both ends of a commit write happen to land
> on stripe boundaries accidentally, which is less than 1% of the time on
> 3 disks.

In the interest of due diligence, and the fact I can't confirm or deny
this myself from reading the code (although I do see many comments
involving RMW in the code), I must ask Qu if he can corroborate this.

Because basically means btrfs raid56 is not better than md raid56 - by
design. It has nothing to do with bugs. This is substantially worse
than the scrub->wrong parity bug.

Does it make sense to proscribe raid5 profile for metadata? As in,
disallow -m raid5 at mkfs time? Maybe recommend raid1. Even raid6
seems like it could be specious - yes there are two copies but if
there is constant RMW, then there's no CoW and we're not really
protected that well with all of these overwrites, statistically

Basically you have to have a setup where there's no chance of torn or
misdirected writes, and no corruptions, in which case Btrfs checksums
aren't really helpful, you're using it for other reasons (snapshots
and what not).

Really seriously the CoW part of Btrfs being violated by all of this
RMW to me sounds like it reduces the pros of Btrfs.

Chris Murphy
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to