Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-10 Thread Anand Jain
(this is deviating from the subject, sorry about that) Pretty much, if you're using just raid1 mode, without compression, on reasonable storage devices, things are rock-solid relative to the rest of BTRFS. IMO, BTRFS volume manger feature is incomplete and there is RAID1 critical bug which

Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-10 Thread Austin S. Hemmelgarn
On 2016-11-09 21:29, Qu Wenruo wrote: At 11/10/2016 06:57 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote: On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: This patch implements multiple devices support for f2fs. Given multiple devices by mkfs.f2fs, f2fs shows them entirely as one big volume

Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-09 Thread Qu Wenruo
At 11/10/2016 06:57 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote: On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: This patch implements multiple devices support for f2fs. Given multiple devices by mkfs.f2fs, f2fs shows them entirely as one big volume under one f2fs instance. Internal block

Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-09 Thread Jaegeuk Kim
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:57:53PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > This patch implements multiple devices support for f2fs. > > Given multiple devices by mkfs.f2fs, f2fs shows them entirely as one big > > volume under one

Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-09 Thread Darrick J. Wong
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 03:57:53PM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > > > This patch implements multiple devices support for f2fs. > > Given multiple devices by mkfs.f2fs, f2fs shows them entirely as one big > > volume under one

Re: [PATCH] f2fs: support multiple devices

2016-11-09 Thread Andreas Dilger
On Nov 9, 2016, at 1:56 PM, Jaegeuk Kim wrote: > > This patch implements multiple devices support for f2fs. > Given multiple devices by mkfs.f2fs, f2fs shows them entirely as one big > volume under one f2fs instance. > > Internal block management is very simple, but we will