[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120619184858.GA8841@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:48:59 -0400
From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com>
To: Spelic <spelic@...ftmail.org>
Cc: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com>,
device-mapper development <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: Ext4 and xfs problems in dm-thin on allocation and discard
On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at 10:44am -0400,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at 9:52am -0400,
> Spelic <spelic@...ftmail.org> wrote:
>
> > I do not know what is the mechanism for which xfs cannot unmap
> > blocks from dm-thin, but it really can't.
> > If anyone has dm-thin installed he can try. This is 100%
> > reproducible for me.
>
> I was initially surprised by this considering the thinp-test-suite does
> test a compilebench workload against xfs and ext4 using online discard
> (-o discard).
>
> But I just modified that test to use a thin-pool with 'ignore_discard'
> and the test still passed on both ext4 and xfs.
>
> So there is more work needed in the thinp-test-suite to use blktrace
> hooks to verify that discards are occuring when the compilebench
> generated files are removed.
>
> I'll work through that and report back.
blktrace shows discards for both xfs and ext4.
But in general xfs is issuing discards with much smaller extents than
ext4 does, e.g.:
to the thin device:
+ 128 vs + 32
to the thin-pool's data device:
+ 120 vs + 16
--
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