On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 04:20:58PM -0700, Tony Plack
wrote:> Chris and team, hats off on the RAID5/6 being at least experimental.
> I have been following your work for a year now, and waiting for these
> days.
>
> I am trying to get my head rapped around the architecture for BTRFS
> before I jump in and start recommending code changes to the branch.
>
> What I am trying to understand is the comments in the GIT commit which
> state:
>
> Read/modify/write is done after the higher levels of the filesystem have
> prepared a given bio. This means the higher layers are not responsible
> for building full stripes, and they don''t need to query for the
topology
> of the extents that may get allocated during delayed allocation runs.
> It also means different files can easily share the same stripe.
>
> As I understand it, what we are doing is trying to hide the underlying
> extents architecture to gain some advantages in the higher level code.
> I have been digging in the code, and believe I know the answer to this
> question. So by "higher levels" does this mean that RMW,
snapshots,
> checksums and duplicate detection are all unaware of RAID
> architecture?
Yes, although the allocator is aware of the raid code, and the raid code
is aware that the higher levels are doing copy-on-write. They also
share the same transaction subsystem, at least until my parity logging
code is complete.
Longer term the two will cooperate more. For example, when we trigger
read/modify/write in RAID because a sub-stripe write was made to a large
file, we might as well use adjacent blocks from that file to fill the
new stripe. This will reduce a lot of complexity in terms of small
extent overhead in the rest of the code.
-chris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs"
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html