[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090107144502.GC17110@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:45:02 -0500
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: Remove "extents" mount option
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 11:02:50AM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 01:49:37PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > This mount option is largely superfluous, and in fact the way it was
> > implemented was buggy; if a filesystem which did not have the extents
> > feature flag was mounted -o extents, the filesystem would attempt to
> > create and use extents-based file even though the extents feature flag
> > was not eabled. The simplest thing to do is to nuke the mount option
> > entirely. It's not all that useful to force the non-creation of new
> > extent-based files if the filesystem can support it.
> >
>
> Ext4 -> Ext3 migration story is to mount the filesystem with -o
> noextents and copy the file around. If we remove the -o noextents
> options how do we force the creation of non extent format files ?
1) How much do we care about ext4->ext3 migration?
2) That only deals with extent-based files; it doesn't deal with any
of the other ext4-specific features.
What's the scenario you're thinking about here? When would it be
useful for users to be able to downgrade extent-based files to
indirect block files by copying files around?
- Ted
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists