Re: [External] [LSF/MM/BPF BoF] Session for Zoned Storage 2023

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

 



> On Jan 9, 2023, at 7:33 AM, Javier González <javier.gonz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 

<skipped>

>>> 
>>> (1) I am going to share SSDFS patchset soon. And topic is:
>>> SSDFS + ZNS SSD: deterministic architecture decreasing TCO cost of data infrastructure.
> 
> 
> Would be good to see the patches before LSF/MM/BPF.
> 

I am making code cleanup now. I am expecting to share patches in two weeks.

> I saw your talk at Plumbers. Do you think you have more data to share
> too? Maybe even a comparisson with btrfs in terms of WAF and Space Amp?
> 

I am working to share more data. So, I should have more details.
I have data for btrfs already. Do you mean that you would like to see comparison
btrfs + compression vs. ssdfs? By the way, I am using my own methodology
to estimate WAF and space amplification. What methodology do you have in mind?
Maybe, I could improve mine. :)

<skipped>

>>> 
>> 
>> I think we can consider such discussions:
>> (1) I assume that we still need to discuss PO2 zone sizes?
> 
> For this discussion to move forward, we need users rather than vendors
> talking about the need. If someone is willing to drive this discussion,
> then it makes sense. I do not believe we will make progress otherwise.
> 

As part of ByteDance, I am on user side now. :) So, let me have some internal
discussion and to summarize vision(s) on our side. I believe that, maybe, it makes
sense to summarize a list of pros and cons and to have something like analysis or
brainstorming here.

<skipped>

> 
>> (4) New ZNS standard features that we need to support on block layer + FS levels?
> 
> Do you have any concrete examples in mind?
> 

My point here that we could summarize:
(1) what features already implemented and supported,
(2) what features are under implementation and what is progress,
(3) what features need to be implemented yet.

Have we implemented everything already? :)

>> (5) ZNS drive emulation + additional testing features?
> 
> Is this QEMU alone or do you have other ideas in mind?
> 

My point is the same here. Let’s summarize how reasonably good is emulation now.
Do we need to support the emulation of any additional features?
And we can talk not only about QEMU.

Thanks,
Slava.
 




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [IDE]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux