On Sun, 25 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Sun, 25 February 2007 03:41:40 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Well, our experimental results say another thing. As I have said, the
greatest part of the files are written at once, so their meta-data blocks
are together on disk. This allows
On Sun, 25 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Sun, 25 February 2007 03:41:40 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Well, our experimental results say another thing. As I have said, the
greatest part of the files are written at once, so their meta-data blocks
are together on disk. This allows
Hi Jörn,
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Thu, 22 February 2007 20:57:12 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I do not agree with this picture, because it does not show that all the
indirect blocks which point to a direct block are along with it in the
same segment
Hi Jörn,
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Thu, 22 February 2007 20:57:12 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I do not agree with this picture, because it does not show that all the
indirect blocks which point to a direct block are along with it in the
same segment
Hi Jörn,
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
A partial segment is a transaction unit, and contains "all" the blocks
modified by a file system operation, including indirect blocks and i-nodes
(actually, it contains the blocks modified by several file system
operations, but let us
Hi Jörn,
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
A partial segment is a transaction unit, and contains all the blocks
modified by a file system operation, including indirect blocks and i-nodes
(actually, it contains the blocks modified by several file system
operations, but let us
for
the meta-data device, which is different to the design that you propose.
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Wed, 21 February 2007 19:31:40 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I do not understand. Do you mean that if I have 10 segments, 5 busy and 5
free, after cleaning I could need
Hi Jörn,
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Wed, 21 February 2007 05:36:22 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I don't see how you can guarantee 50% free segments. Can you explain
that bit?
It is quite simple. If 50% of your segments are busy, and the other 50%
are free
Hi Jörn,
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Wed, 21 February 2007 05:36:22 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I don't see how you can guarantee 50% free segments. Can you explain
that bit?
It is quite simple. If 50% of your segments are busy, and the other 50%
are free
for
the meta-data device, which is different to the design that you propose.
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Wed, 21 February 2007 19:31:40 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
I do not understand. Do you mean that if I have 10 segments, 5 busy and 5
free, after cleaning I could need
Hi Jörn,
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Tue, 20 February 2007 00:57:50 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Actually, the GC may become a problem when the number of free segments is
50% or less. If your LFS always guarantees, at least, 50% of free
"segments" (note
Hi Jörn,
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Tue, 20 February 2007 00:57:50 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Actually, the GC may become a problem when the number of free segments is
50% or less. If your LFS always guarantees, at least, 50% of free
segments (note that I am
Hi Jörn,
I understand the problem that you describe with respect to the GC, but
let me explain why I think that it has a small impact on DualFS.
Actually, the GC may become a problem when the number of free segments is
50% or less. If your LFS always guarantees, at least, 50% of free
Hi Jörn,
I understand the problem that you describe with respect to the GC, but
let me explain why I think that it has a small impact on DualFS.
Actually, the GC may become a problem when the number of free segments is
50% or less. If your LFS always guarantees, at least, 50% of free
Hi,
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
If you stripe two disks with a standard fs versus use one of them
as metadata volume and the other as data volume with dualfs i would
expect the striped variant usually be faster because it will give
parallelism not only to data versus metadata, but
Hi Jörn,
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Thu, 15 February 2007 19:38:14 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
The patch for 2.6.11 is not still stable enough to be released. Be patient
;-)
While I don't want to discourage you, this is about the point in
development where
Hi Andi,
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
Juan Piernas Canovas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[playing devil's advocate here]
If the data and meta-data devices of DualFS can be on different disks,
DualFS is able to READ and WRITE data and meta-data blocks in
PARALLEL.
XFS
Hi all,
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Feb 14 2007 16:10, sfaibish wrote:
1. DualFS has only one copy of every meta-data block. This copy is
in the meta-data device,
Where does this differ from typical filesystems like xfs?
At least ext3 and xfs have an option to store the
Hi all,
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Feb 14 2007 16:10, sfaibish wrote:
1. DualFS has only one copy of every meta-data block. This copy is
in the meta-data device,
Where does this differ from typical filesystems like xfs?
At least ext3 and xfs have an option to store the
Hi Andi,
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
Juan Piernas Canovas [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[playing devil's advocate here]
If the data and meta-data devices of DualFS can be on different disks,
DualFS is able to READ and WRITE data and meta-data blocks in
PARALLEL.
XFS can do this too
Hi Jörn,
On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, [utf-8] Jörn Engel wrote:
On Thu, 15 February 2007 19:38:14 +0100, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
The patch for 2.6.11 is not still stable enough to be released. Be patient
;-)
While I don't want to discourage you, this is about the point in
development where
Hi,
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:
If you stripe two disks with a standard fs versus use one of them
as metadata volume and the other as data volume with dualfs i would
expect the striped variant usually be faster because it will give
parallelism not only to data versus metadata, but
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Tim Waugh wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 03:55:01PM +0200, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
>
> > The kernel configuration is the same in both 2.2.17 and 2.2.19.
> > Perhaps, the problem is not in the ppa module, but in the parport,
> > parport_pc
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Hi!.
When I execute "modprobe ppa" while running a kernel 2.2.19, my computer
hangs completely. No messages. System request key does not work.
The kernel configuration is the same in both 2.2.17 and 2.2.19.
Perhaps, t
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
Hi!.
When I execute "modprobe ppa" while running a kernel 2.2.19, my computer
hangs completely. No messages. System request key does not work.
The kernel configuration is the same in both 2.2.17 and 2.2.19.
Perhaps, t
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Tim Waugh wrote:
On Fri, Mar 30, 2001 at 03:55:01PM +0200, Juan Piernas Canovas wrote:
The kernel configuration is the same in both 2.2.17 and 2.2.19.
Perhaps, the problem is not in the ppa module, but in the parport,
parport_pc or parport_probe modules
Hi all!
I need some information about kernel threads, specifically about signal
handling. Where can I get any documents about that?
Thanks in advance.
Juan.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
Hi all!
I need some information about kernel threads, specifically about signal
handling. Where can I get any documents about that?
Thanks in advance.
Juan.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More
28 matches
Mail list logo
