What happened to the hot data tracking feature in btrfs? There are a lot of old patches from aug 2010, but it looks like the feature has been completly removed from the current version of btrfs. Is this feature still on the roadmap?
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 05:49:41AM +0100, Timo Witte wrote:> What happened to the hot data tracking feature in btrfs? There are a lot > of old patches from aug 2010, but it looks like the feature has been > completly removed from the current version of btrfs. Is this feature > still on the roadmap?Removed? AFAIK it hasn''t been ever merged, though it''s be a nice feature. There were suggestions to turn it into a generic API for any filesystem to use, but this hasn''t happened. The patches are quite independent and it was easy to refresh them on top of current for-linus branch. A test run did not survive a "random" xfstest, 013 this time, so I probably mismerged some bits. The patchset lives in branch foreign/ibm/hotdatatrack in my git repo. david -- 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
David Sterba wrote:> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 05:49:41AM +0100, Timo Witte wrote: >> What happened to the hot data tracking feature in btrfs? There are a lot >> of old patches from aug 2010, but it looks like the feature has been >> completly removed from the current version of btrfs. Is this feature >> still on the roadmap? > Removed? AFAIK it hasn''t been ever merged, though it''s be a nice > feature. There were suggestions to turn it into a generic API for any > filesystem to use, but this hasn''t happened. > > The patches are quite independent and it was easy to refresh them on top > of current for-linus branch. A test run did not survive a "random" > xfstest, 013 this time, so I probably mismerged some bits. The patchset > lives in branch foreign/ibm/hotdatatrack in my git repo. > > > david >Someone recently mentioned bcache in another post who seems to cover this subject fairly well. However would it not make sense if btrfs actually was able to automatically take advantage of whatever disks is added to the pool? For example if you have 10 disk of different size and performance in a raid5/6 like configuration would it not be feasible if btrfs automagically (option) could manage it''s own cache? For example it could reserve a chunk of free space as cache (based on how much data is free) and stripe data over all disks (cache). When the filesystem becomes idle or at set intervals it could empty the cache or move/rebalance pending writes over to the original raid5/6 like setup. As far as I remember hot data tracking was all about moving the data over to the fastest disk. Why not utilize all disks and benefit from disks working together? Svein Engelsgjerd -- 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
On Thursday 03 of May 2012 15:09:25 Waxhead wrote:> David Sterba wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 05:49:41AM +0100, Timo Witte wrote: > >> What happened to the hot data tracking feature in btrfs? There are a lot > >> of old patches from aug 2010, but it looks like the feature has been > >> completly removed from the current version of btrfs. Is this feature > >> still on the roadmap? > > > > Removed? AFAIK it hasn''t been ever merged, though it''s be a nice > > feature. There were suggestions to turn it into a generic API for any > > filesystem to use, but this hasn''t happened. > > > > The patches are quite independent and it was easy to refresh them on top > > of current for-linus branch. A test run did not survive a "random" > > xfstest, 013 this time, so I probably mismerged some bits. The patchset > > lives in branch foreign/ibm/hotdatatrack in my git repo. > > > > > > david > > Someone recently mentioned bcache in another post who seems to cover > this subject fairly well.bcache does one very specific assertion that isn''t met by btrfs: overwring old data in a file writes data to the same place on the disk, same goes for metadata. In other words, it won''t work with COW file system.> However would it not make sense if btrfs > actually was able to automatically take advantage of whatever disks is > added to the pool? For example if you have 10 disk of different size and > performance in a raid5/6 like configuration would it not be feasible if > btrfs automagically (option) could manage it''s own cache? For example it > could reserve a chunk of free space as cache (based on how much data is > free) and stripe data over all disks (cache). When the filesystem > becomes idle or at set intervals it could empty the cache or > move/rebalance pending writes over to the original raid5/6 like setup. > As far as I remember hot data tracking was all about moving the data > over to the fastest disk. Why not utilize all disks and benefit from > disks working together?For this to work, you need feature set that allows hot data movement between disks and data restriping. Then such cache feature will use much of the same code. Regards, -- Hubert Kario QBS - Quality Business Software 02-656 Warszawa, ul. Ksawerów 30/85 tel. +48 (22) 646-61-51, 646-74-24 www.qbs.com.pl -- 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