On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 09:32:14 PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 04:28:48PM +0530, Chandan Babu R wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 07:06:58 AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 5:11 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 10:46:32AM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 7:46 AM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > On Sat, Apr 15, 2023 at 03:18:05PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote: >> >> > > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 10:49 PM Darrick J. Wong <djwong@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > ... >> >> > > > Darrick, >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Quick question. >> >> > > > You indicated that you would like to discuss the topics: >> >> > > > Atomic file contents exchange >> >> > > > Atomic directio writes >> >> > > >> >> > > This one ^^^^^^^^ topic should still get its own session, ideally with >> >> > > Martin Petersen and John Garry running it. A few cloud vendors' >> >> > > software defined storage stacks can support multi-lba atomic writes, and >> >> > > some database software could take advantage of that to reduce nested WAL >> >> > > overhead. >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > CC Martin. >> >> > If you want to lead this session, please schedule it. >> >> > >> >> > > > Are those intended to be in a separate session from online fsck? >> >> > > > Both in the same session? >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I know you posted patches for FIEXCHANGE_RANGE [1], >> >> > > > but they were hiding inside a huge DELUGE and people >> >> > > > were on New Years holidays, so nobody commented. >> >> > > >> >> > > After 3 years of sparse review comments, I decided to withdraw >> >> > > FIEXCHANGE_RANGE from general consideration after realizing that very >> >> > > few filesystems actually have the infrastructure to support atomic file >> >> > > contents exchange, hence there's little to be gained from undertaking >> >> > > fsdevel bikeshedding. >> >> > > >> >> > > > Perhaps you should consider posting an uptodate >> >> > > > topic suggestion to let people have an opportunity to >> >> > > > start a discussion before LSFMM. >> >> > > >> >> > > TBH, most of my fs complaints these days are managerial problems (Are we >> >> > > spending too much time on LTS? How on earth do we prioritize projects >> >> > > with all these drive by bots?? Why can't we support large engineering >> >> > > efforts better???) than technical. >> >> > >> >> > I penciled one session for "FS stable backporting (and other LTS woes)". >> >> > I made it a cross FS/IO session so we can have this session in the big room >> >> > and you are welcome to pull this discussion to any direction you want. >> >> >> >> Ok, thank you. Hopefully we can get all the folks who do backports into >> >> this one. That might be a big ask for Chandan, depending on when you >> >> schedule it. >> >> >> >> (Unless it's schedule for 7pm :P) >> >> >> > >> > Oh thanks for reminding me! >> > I moved it to Wed 9am, so it is more convenient for Chandan. >> >> This maps to 9:30 AM for me. Thanks for selecting a time which is convenient >> for me. > > Er... doesn't 9:30am for Chandan map to 9:00*pm* the previous evening > for those of us in Vancouver? > > (Or I guess 9:30pm for Chandan if we actually are having a morning > session?) Sorry, you are right. I mixed up AM/PM. It will indeed be 9:30 PM for me and I am fine with the time schedule. > > Chandan: I'll ask Shirley to cancel our staff meeting so you don't have > a crazy(er) meeting schedule during LSF. Sure. Thank you. -- chandan
