Re: BTRFS SSD

2010-09-30 Thread Sander
Yuehai Xu wrote (ao): So, is it a bottleneck in the case of SSD since the cost for over write is very high? For every write, I think the superblocks should be overwritten, it might be much more frequent than other common blocks in SSD, even though SSD will do wear leveling inside by its FTL.

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Kay Sievers
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 01:43, Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:25, Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com wrote: Second question is why is checking in /sys a big deal, would ??you prefer an

Re: BTRFS SSD

2010-09-30 Thread David Brown
On 29/09/2010 23:31, Yuehai Xu wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Sean Bartellwingedtachik...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 02:45:29PM -0400, Yuehai Xu wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sean Bartellwingedtachik...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:30:14AM

Re: BTRFS SSD

2010-09-30 Thread Yuehai Xu
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:51 AM, David Brown da...@westcontrol.com wrote: On 29/09/2010 23:31, Yuehai Xu wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Sean Bartellwingedtachik...@gmail.com  wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 02:45:29PM -0400, Yuehai Xu wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Sean

Re: BTRFS SSD

2010-09-30 Thread Yuehai Xu
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:15 AM, Sander san...@humilis.net wrote: Yuehai Xu wrote (ao): So, is it a bottleneck in the case of SSD since the cost for over write is very high? For every write, I think the superblocks should be overwritten, it might be much more frequent than other common blocks

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Josef Bacik
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:43:00AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 01:43, Christoph Hellwig h...@infradead.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:25, Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com wrote: Second question is

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Andi Kleen
Kay Sievers kay.siev...@vrfy.org writes: Yeah, we thought about that too, but a btrfs mount does not show up as a block device, like md/dm, so there is no place for a slaves/ directory in /sys with the individual disks listed. How could be solve that? Create some fake blockdev for every btrfs

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Josef Bacik
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 07:43:27PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:25, Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com wrote: Second question is why is checking in /sys a big deal, would ??you prefer an

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Kay Sievers
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 21:48, Josef Bacik jo...@redhat.com wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 07:43:27PM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 10:04:31AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 09:25, Ric Wheeler rwhee...@redhat.com wrote: Second question is why

Re: [PATCH] Btrfs: add a disk info ioctl to get the disks attached to a filesystem

2010-09-30 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Thu, 30.09.10 21:59, Kay Sievers (kay.siev...@vrfy.org) wrote: So my question is, is this what we want?  Do I just need to quit bitching and make it work?  Or am I doing something wrong?  This is a completely new area for me so I'm just looking around at what md/dm does and trying