Re: Recommended btrfs mount options

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Nov 22, 2011, Sage Weil <sage@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Nov 2011, Christian Brunner wrote:

>> - compression: I'm using lzo compression right now, as my CPUs in the
>> OSD nodes where idle most of the time and it is improving throughput
>> quite a bit.

> The caveat here is that there is a corner case with inline extents and the 
> clone ioctl that isn't implemented.

What happens when you trigger that case?  Crash or corruption?

I ask because I've been running with zlib compression, and I haven't
noticed any problems along these lines, though I haven't got to a point
in which I'm doing more than rsyncing whole trees into the filesystem
yet.

>> - nocluster (requires an additional btrfs patch from Alexandre): I was
>> reading that he was able to reduce the excessive metadata overhead,
>> but it is slower. Does anyone know more about it?

> We haven't tried this.

I've used it occasionally and temporarily, to rebalance metadata and
bring btrfs (even with clustered allocation) back to a faster pace
without umount.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist      Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [CEPH Users]     [Ceph Large]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux BTRFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]
  Powered by Linux