Dne 31.7.2018 v 23:17 Marc MERLIN napsal(a):
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
If you monitor amount of free space for data AND for metadata in thin-pool
yourself you can keep easily threshold == 100.
Understood. Two things:
1) basically threshold < 100 allows
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 8:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:33 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>> "Chris" == Chris Murphy writes:
>>
>> Chris> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel
>> wrote:
Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 7:33 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>> "Chris" == Chris Murphy writes:
>
> Chris> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>>
>>> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
>>> filesystems in Linux land that I'm aware of supports shrinking
> "Chris" == Chris Murphy writes:
Chris> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>>
>> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
>> filesystems in Linux land that I'm aware of supports shrinking the
>> filesystem while live, it's all a unmount, shrink
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 02:35:42PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> If you monitor amount of free space for data AND for metadata in thin-pool
> yourself you can keep easily threshold == 100.
Understood. Two things:
1) basically threshold < 100 allows you to hit the limit, have LVM pause
IO,
Dne 31.7.2018 v 04:44 Marc MERLIN napsal(a):
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:26:58AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your helpful reply.
Ha again Zdenek,
Just to confirm, am I going to be ok enough with the scheme I described
as long as I ensure that 'Allocated pool data' does
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 1:31 PM, John Stoffel wrote:
>
> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
> filesystems in Linux land that I'm aware of supports shrinking the
> filesystem while live, it's all a unmount, shrink FS, shrink volume
> (carefully!) and then re-mount
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:26:58AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
> Hi Zdenek,
>
> Thanks for your helpful reply.
Ha again Zdenek,
Just to confirm, am I going to be ok enough with the scheme I described
as long as I ensure that 'Allocated pool data' does not get to 100% ?
For now, I have my btrfs
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 05:09:54PM -0400, John Stoffel wrote:
> That's the key part that I didn't realize. And this is why I'm still
> leary of btrfs (and zfs for that matter) since as you push the limits,
> they tend to fall off a cliff performance wise, instead of degrading
> more gracefully.
> "Marc" == Marc MERLIN writes:
Marc> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 03:31:36PM -0400, John Stoffel wrote:
>> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
>> filesystems in Linux land that I'm aware of supports shrinking the
>> filesystem while live, it's all a unmount, shrink
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 03:31:36PM -0400, John Stoffel wrote:
> Why don't you run quotas on your filesystems? Also, none of the
> filesystems in Linux land that I'm aware of supports shrinking the
> filesystem while live, it's all a unmount, shrink FS, shrink volume
> (carefully!) and then
> "Marc" == Marc MERLIN writes:
Marc> Hi Zdenek,
Marc> Thanks for your helpful reply.
Marc> On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 02:59:28PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
>> Dne 26.7.2018 v 18:31 Marc MERLIN napsal(a):
>> >Still learning about thin volumes.
>> >Why do I want my thin pool to get auto
Hi Zdenek,
Thanks for your helpful reply.
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 02:59:28PM +0200, Zdenek Kabelac wrote:
> Dne 26.7.2018 v 18:31 Marc MERLIN napsal(a):
> >Still learning about thin volumes.
> >Why do I want my thin pool to get auto extended? Does "extended" mean
> >resized?
>
> yes extension
Dne 26.7.2018 v 18:31 Marc MERLIN napsal(a):
Still learning about thin volumes.
Why do I want my thin pool to get auto extended? Does "extended" mean
resized?
yes extension == resize
Why would I want to have thin_pool_autoextend_threshold below 100 and
have it auto extend as needed vs
Still learning about thin volumes.
Why do I want my thin pool to get auto extended? Does "extended" mean
resized?
Why would I want to have thin_pool_autoextend_threshold below 100 and
have it auto extend as needed vs having all of them be at 100, knowing
that underlying block allocation will fail
15 matches
Mail list logo
