[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 Wayne Davison changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED Resolution|---

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #26 from Marcus Linsner --- There is a fix for this feature, here: https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13320 It worksforme. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use reply-all

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #24 from Theodore Ts'o --- So a simple workaround would be to use fallocate with KEEP_SIZE at first, then use punch whole, write the blocks, etc., and then use either truncate to set i_size, or seek to the desired size

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #23 from Wayne Davison --- > Continuing to think aloud. It's not really a hole, it's already reserved > space. Exactly, and it's impossible to punch holes in that allocation. I'm changing my patch to give the file a

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #22 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Andrey Gursky from comment #21) Continuing to think aloud. It's not really a hole, it's already reserved space. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #21 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Andrey Gursky from comment #20) Sorry, it is indeed preallocated. Other still holds: hole-punch doesn't fail because the file already consists of only hole. Such file I

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #20 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #17) From what I see, it doesn't fail, since the file is not preallocated at all with FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE, but just a fully sparse file is

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #19 from Wayne Davison --- Also, to be more like rsync would do you can follow the hole-punch with a seek and a write so that the file ends up with a non-zero size. Apparently if I change the order to do the seek &

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #18 from Wayne Davison --- FYI, I tested on Linux 4.2.0 and 3.10.0 (I don't have a newer kernel running here to try). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please use

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #17 from Wayne Davison --- Take the test program and change the SYS_fallocate to use the FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE flag (don't forget to "rm test-file") and it will fail. Rsync always pre-allocates with FALLOC_FL_KEEP_SIZE

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #16 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Theodore Ts'o from comment #15) Theo, thanks for taking time to test it! This works for me too (Debian Testing 4.7.4-2, ext4): $ /usr/sbin/filefrag -v test-file

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #15 from Theodore Ts'o --- Created attachment 12557 --> https://bugzilla.samba.org/attachment.cgi?id=12557=edit Test program to show that fallocate followed by punch hole works just fine -- You are receiving this

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #14 from Theodore Ts'o --- >I believe "on the same file handle" is the unusual prerequisite to trigger the >>behavior described by Wayne. I was fairly sure that was a red herring, so I was trying to save myself some

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #13 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Theodore Ts'o from comment #11) Theo, I believe "on the same file handle" is the unusual prerequisite to trigger the behavior described by Wayne. Or such a test is

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #12 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #9) >> Hole-punch works only for full filesystem blocks > That has nothing to do with it. Wayne, OK, might be. I haven't tested it the

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #11 from Theodore Ts'o --- Re: #9. I'm not able to reproduce the described behavior. If you want to follow up on what you think is a kernel bug, please send a simple repro program or script and what version of the

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #10 from Wayne Davison --- > ... I can share my work. Sounds interesting! Looking forward to seeing what you've come up with. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug. -- Please

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #9 from Wayne Davison --- > Hole-punch works only for full filesystem blocks That has nothing to do with it. If you fallocate() the full file length and then (on the same file handle) try to punch out parts of the

[Bug 11588] better handling for --preallocate with --sparse

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11588 --- Comment #8 from Andrey Gursky --- (In reply to Wayne Davison from comment #7) Wayne, since this bug made rsync unusable for me, I fixed that and implemented additional checks needed for ext4 a month or two after I