similar to: SSDs and filesystem alignment...

Hi Everyone, I am very new to this mailing list and very much interested in getting into the internals of BTRFS file system I was looking for mkfs.btrfs source code so that I can start getting how the disk is formatted with btrfs system. Can anyone of you redirect me to that place to download the btrfsprogs source code. Thanks in advance. Debasish -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On 13 September 2017 at 09:25, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >> John R Pierce wrote: >>> >>> On 9/9/2017 9:47 AM, hw wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Isn?t it easier for SSDs to write small chunks of data at a time? >>>> The small chunk might fit into some free space more easily than >>>> a

Hi btrfs-team/-users, I do observe a strange behavior upon booting of my openSUSE 12.1 system ( kernel 3.1.10-1.9-desktop; x86_64 ) with btrfsprogs-0.19-43.7.1.x86_64 utils installed: The system has two btrfs-vols: root(sda7) & home(sda8) and had been created during system setup of openSUSE 12.1: # btrfs filesystem show Label: none uuid: a288fcff-28c8-4764-8efe-1e0cb205d588

It looks like isoinfo is in that package since openSUSE Leap 42.1, so make sure to include it to not break the isoinfo* APIs. --- appliance/packagelist.in | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/appliance/packagelist.in b/appliance/packagelist.in index 5cf2276..0a71cc3 100644 --- a/appliance/packagelist.in +++ b/appliance/packagelist.in @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ ifelse(SUSE,1, dnl It

Hi, First, sorry if this isn''t the place to get this kind of help... If not, I appreciate some link , forum, where I can try get some answers... My problem: * Using btrfs + compression , flush of 60 MB/s take 4 minutes.... (on this 4 minutes they keep constatly I/O of +- 4MB/s no disks) (flush from Informix database) The enviroment : * Virtualized environment * OpenSuse 12.1 64bits,

John R Pierce wrote: > On 9/9/2017 9:47 AM, hw wrote: >> >> Isn?t it easier for SSDs to write small chunks of data at a time? >> The small chunk might fit into some free space more easily than >> a large one which needs to be spread out all over the place. > > > the SSD collects data blocks being written and when a full flash block worth of data is collected,

On 13 September 2017 at 12:00, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: >> >> It will depend on the type of SSD. Ones with large cache and various >> smarts (SAS Enterprise type) can take many different sizes. For SATA >> ones it depends on what the cache and write of the SSD is and very few >> of them seem to be the same. The SSD also has all kinds of logic which >>

Since btrfs does not do recursive atomic snapshots (which I am ok with), I am doing this myself. A handful of suggestions/problems came up. 1. Maybe btrfsprogs could gain an option to do recursive non-atomic snapshots at the userspace level, simply invoking low-level atomic snapshots one by one? For the following, the kernel is 3.4.4 with the too-overloaded "0.19" version of

Hi HPA et al, When moving from syslinux 4.06 to 5.01, I found serial output isn't working. The issue reproduces simply [1] and I get back serial output when I move back to syslinux 4.06. I also see a regression in booting locally with 'localboot 0' which give a generic 'failed' error message; likely reproducible there also. Let me know if you need more information and

Hi all, I have a dataset consisting of 5 columns and over 5000 rows. Each row gives information about an individual animal, including longevity, i.e. at what age an animal died. For the model I use I need to create n rows for each animal, n being its longevity, and a new column 'survival' with a binary 0/1 outcome. When an animal died e.g. at age 5, there have to be 5 rows of identical

On 9 February 2014 02:57, Ilia Mirkin <imirkin at alum.mit.edu> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Daniel J Blueman <daniel at quora.org> wrote: >> Interestingly, there was graphical failure booting 3.6.11, even >> nvidia-current fails to initialise, but these two issues could be due >> to running the Xorg stack in Ubuntu 14.04 pre-release. Using >>

Hi, I was just wondering if there are specific steps to take to install CentOS on SSDs... By example, no swap partition? Format with a flash fs? Sysctl parameters? Thx, JD

Hi Everyone, We are thinking of venturing into the world of hosting Windows DomUs on our Xen infrastructure. As Windows generally requires a lot more IOPS than Linux does, we are trying to do everything we can to improve performance. While using SSDs would solve the IOPS problem, SSDs suffer from limited write cycles. So, we have the idea of using Flashcache from Facebook to use a single SSD as

Hi Dongyang, Yan, When testing BTRFS with RAID 0 metadata on linux-3.3, we see discard ranges exceeding the end of the block device [1], potentially causing dataloss; when this occurs, filesystem writeback becomes catatonic due to continual resubmission. The reproducer is quite simple [2]. Hope this proves useful... Thanks, Daniel --- [1] attempt to access beyond end of device ram0: rw=129,

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Daniel J Blueman <daniel at 1degreenorth.com> wrote: > On 27/05/2013 17:53, Ferenc Wagner wrote: >> >> Daniel J Blueman <daniel at 1degreenorth.com> writes: >> >>> When moving from syslinux 4.06 to 5.01, I found serial output isn't >>> working. The issue reproduces simply [1] and I get back serial output

Hi all, are there any plans that future versions of mkfs.btrfs will do an initial pre-discard for SSDs? (AFAIK mkfs.btrfs does not do this currently) For Ext4, mke2fs does this with the -E discard option. From the mke2fs manpage: -E discard Attempt to discard blocks at mkfs time (discarding blocks initially is useful on solid state devices and sparse / thin-provisioned storage). When

On 13 September 2017 at 09:25, hw <hw at gc-24.de> wrote: > John R Pierce wrote: >> >> On 9/9/2017 9:47 AM, hw wrote: >>> >>> >>> Isn?t it easier for SSDs to write small chunks of data at a time? >>> The small chunk might fit into some free space more easily than >>> a large one which needs to be spread out all over the place.

On 9/13/2017 9:21 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > ...The SATA hard drives....[It doesn't matter the brand.. they get built with the same tech and at the same place these days.] thats most assuredly not true.?? HD manufacturing is extremely competitive, there's no WAY they 'are built at the same place'. Each of the few remaining major brands of HD's has their own

On Wed, September 13, 2017 2:16 pm, John R Pierce wrote: > On 9/13/2017 9:21 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >> ...The SATA hard drives....[It doesn't matter the brand.. they get built >> with the same tech and at the same place these days.] > > > thats most assuredly not true.???? HD manufacturing is extremely > competitive, there's no WAY they 'are built at

Hello I'm trying to make survival curves for some longevity data - 100 males and 100 females, some of which are still living (not dead at the end of survey) I would like to make sex specific survival curves as time on the X axis, proportion alive on the Y, and a line for each sex (two lines) Data looks like this: Focal DOB DOD Longevity Sex 1 89-04-20 na