Nice write-up. It is concerning that we have to go to such lengths but I don't see a way around it without limiting who can consume thinp. On Wed, Feb 22 2012 at 9:14am -0500, Joe Thornber <thornber@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > ** Discards > > DISCARDs *must* result in data being zeroed. Some devices set the > discard_zeroes_data flag. This is not good enough; you cannot use > this flag as a guarantee that the data no longer exists on the > disk. So real zeroing must occur. I suggest we write a separate > target that zeroes data just before discarding it, and stack it > under the thin-pool. The performance impact of this will be > significant; to the point that we may wish to turn discard within > the fs off; instead doing periodic tidy-ups. ... > ** Summary of work items [0/5] > > - [ ] Implement the discard-really-zeroes target [1 month] I don't think it'll take a month. Probably a focused week to 2 weeks. I can develop this target before jumping in to the HSM target (unless you'd rather I start in on HSM asap). -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
