[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 14:52:40 -0600
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>
CC: "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext4: indirect block allocations not sequential in 3.4.67 and
3.11.7
On 1/16/14, 1:12 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 01:48:26PM -0500, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
>>
>> Any idea when this commit was made or titled? I care about random
>> performance as well, but that can't be at the cost of making sequential
>> reads suck.
>
> Thinking about this some more, I think it was made as part of the
> changes to better take advantage of the flex_bg feature in ext4. The
> idea was to keep metadata blocks such as directory blocks and extent
> trees closer together. I don't think when we made that change we
> really consciously thought that much about indirect block support,
> since that was viewed as a legacy feature for backwards compatibility
> support in ext4. (This was years ago, before distributions started
> wanting to support only one code base for ext3 and ext4 file systems.)
Just to nitpick, wasn't this always the plan? ;)
https://lkml.org/lkml/2006/6/28/454 :
> 4) At some point, probably in 6-9 months when we are satisified with the
> set of features that have been added to fs/ext4, and confident that the
> filesystem format has stablized, we will submit a patch which causes the
> fs/ext4 code to register itself as the ext4 filesystem.
-Eric
p.s. "6-9 months" ;)
--
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