Or for a completely different approach: I wonder if ftruncate() would be more efficient on COW systems anyway. The minimum thing we need is for the file system to remember the new size, 'cause, erm, we don't. All the rest is probably a waste of cycles, since they reserve real space (or fail to) later in the checkpointer or whatever process eventually writes the data out.
- [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never compress post... Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never comp... Tomas Vondra
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to never ... Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs to ne... Thomas Munro
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs t... Thomas Munro
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes bt... Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: [PING] fallocate() cause... Thomas Munro
- Re: [PING] fallocate() c... Dimitrios Apostolou
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs t... Tomas Vondra
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes bt... Jakub Wartak
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs t... Tom Lane
- Re: [PING] fallocate() causes btrfs t... Bruce Momjian