On Mar 22, 2013, at 11:12 AM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.ru wrote:
The disk is an iscsi disk that in my benchmarks performs roughly like a
local raid with 2-3 SATA disks.
I think you should re-verify if this is still the case. Maybe your block
device performance suddenly plummeted for
On Mar 22, 2013, at 10:37, Mitch Harder mitch.har...@sabayonlinux.org wrote:
If you can, it would be interesting to know how well the cleaner runs
across iSCSI if nothing else is running. If you could delete a single
snapshot, and make note of the space used before and after the cleaner
Hi Miao,
I am seeing another issue. Your fix prevents from TRANS_START to get
in the way of a committing transaction. But it does not prevent from
TRANS_JOIN. On the other hand, btrfs_commit_transaction has the
following loop:
do {
// attempt to do some useful stuff and/or sleep
} while
I don't know where I'm supposed to send this, so I'm taking a wild
ass guess and sending it to this list.
Please fwd if necessary
THX
# uname -a
Linux hostname 3.8.4-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Wed Mar 20 22:10:25 CET
2013 x86_64 GNU/Linux
# btrfs --version
Btrfs v0.20-rc1
btrfs filesystem was
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:13:22 +0200, Alex Lyakas wrote:
Hi Miao,
I am seeing another issue. Your fix prevents from TRANS_START to get
in the way of a committing transaction. But it does not prevent from
TRANS_JOIN. On the other hand, btrfs_commit_transaction has the
following loop:
do {
On 2013年03月21日 14:13, Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:
_require_nobigloopfs has been removed.
We should use _require_no_large_scratch_dev in the test script.
Signed-off-by: Wang Sheng-Hui shh...@gmail.com
---
276 |3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/276 b/276
index
