I had a spare piece of hardware sitting around, so I thought I'd test btrfs
performance with the Cyrus IMAPd server by setting up an extra replica target
on the spare machine.
Some background on Cyrus replication: when copying a folder the replication
system first "reserves" all messages it's g
According to scripts/coccinelle/null/eno.cocci "The various basic
memory allocation functions don't return ERR_PTR" so there's no
point in calling IS_ERR() on the return value from them, the
existing test is good enough.
Signed-off-by: Chris Samuel
---
fs/btrfs/extent_map.c |2 +-
1 files ch
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 12:17:56AM +0100, Arne Jansen wrote:
> 'unused' calculated with wrong sign in reserve_metadata_bytes().
> This might have lead to unwanted over-reservations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arne Jansen
> ---
> fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 del
'unused' calculated with wrong sign in reserve_metadata_bytes().
This might have lead to unwanted over-reservations.
Signed-off-by: Arne Jansen
---
fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c
ind
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 07:33:57PM +, h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
> From 2de353ddda78ef5cbc84e1d3267606bc44e48faa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Gaah. This worked last night. Sorry. :(
--
=== Hugo Mills: h...@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk ===
PGP key: 515C238D from wwwkeys.eu
>From 2de353ddda78ef5cbc84e1d3267606bc44e48faa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id:
<2de353ddda78ef5cbc84e1d3267606bc44e48faa.1289589812.git.h...@carfax.org.uk>
From: Hugo Mills
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 00:18:12 +
Subject: [PATCH] Clean up typography in the man pages.
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel
>From 2de353ddda78ef5cbc84e1d3267606bc44e48faa Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
Message-Id:
<2de353ddda78ef5cbc84e1d3267606bc44e48faa.1289589812.git.h...@carfax.org.uk>
From: Hugo Mills
Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 00:18:12 +
Subject: [PATCH] Clean up typography in the man pages.
To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 11:36:55AM +, Hugo Mills wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:28:08PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
> > On 12/11/10 12:33, Li Zefan wrote:
> >
> > > Is there any blocker that prevents us from canceling balance
> > > by just Ctrl+C ?
> >
> > Given that there's been at least
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 6:28 AM, Marek Otahal wrote:
> On Friday 12 of November 2010 18:44:12 you wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 05:47:14PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
>> >> On 11/11/10 23:52, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> >> > This feature incu
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 4:44 AM, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 05:47:14PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
>>> On 11/11/10 23:52, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>>
>>> > This feature incurs a performance penalty in larger filesystems, it is
>>>
On Friday 12 of November 2010 18:44:12 you wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 05:47:14PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
> >> On 11/11/10 23:52, Josef Bacik wrote:
> >> > This feature incurs a performance penalty in larger filesystems, it is
> >> >
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 03:28:08PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
> On 12/11/10 12:33, Li Zefan wrote:
>
> > Is there any blocker that prevents us from canceling balance
> > by just Ctrl+C ?
>
> Given that there's been at least 1 report of it taking 12 hours
> to balance a non-trivial amount of data
Helmut Hullen wrote (ao):
> Du meintest am 12.11.10:
> > My humble opinion: I very much like the way mdadm works, with the
> > progress bar in /proc/mdstat if an array is rebuilding for example.
>
> Hmmm - it blocks the console for a long time.
Actually, mdadm doesn't block the console as it retu
Hallo, Sander,
Du meintest am 12.11.10:
>> Given that there's been at least 1 report of it taking 12 hours
>> to balance a non-trivial amount of data I suspect putting this
>> operation into the background by default and having the cancel
>> option might be a better plan.
>>
>> Thoughts ?
> My h
Is there an option in btrfs for this mode of RAID? I know it supports
the equivalent of RAID10, but what I am after is JBOD of mirrors. The
reason I want this is for making a really low power home NAS, typically
for home theater/media use. I believe this would yield better power
savings in the ave
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 11:41 PM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 05:47:14PM +1100, Chris Samuel wrote:
>> On 11/11/10 23:52, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>
>> > This feature incurs a performance penalty in larger filesystems, it is
>> > recommended for use with filesystems of 1 GiB or smaller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12.11.2010 10:07, Sander wrote:
> Chris Samuel wrote (ao):
>> On 12/11/10 12:33, Li Zefan wrote:
>>
>>> Is there any blocker that prevents us from canceling balance by
>>> just Ctrl+C ?
>>
>> Given that there's been at least 1 report of it taking
Chris Samuel wrote (ao):
> On 12/11/10 12:33, Li Zefan wrote:
>
> > Is there any blocker that prevents us from canceling balance
> > by just Ctrl+C ?
>
> Given that there's been at least 1 report of it taking 12 hours
> to balance a non-trivial amount of data I suspect putting this
> operation in
Hallo, Chris,
Du meintest am 12.11.10:
>> Is there any blocker that prevents us from canceling balance
>> by just Ctrl+C ?
> Given that there's been at least 1 report of it taking 12 hours
> to balance a non-trivial amount of data I suspect putting this
> operation into the background by default
19 matches
Mail list logo
