[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [dm-devel] Ext4 and xfs problems in dm-thin on allocation and discard
- From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer redhat com>
- To: Spelic <spelic shiftmail org>
- Cc: Lukáš Czerner <lczerner redhat com>, device-mapper development <dm-devel redhat com>, linux-ext4 vger kernel org, Dave Chinner <david fromorbit com>, xfs oss sgi com
- Subject: Re: [dm-devel] Ext4 and xfs problems in dm-thin on allocation and discard
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:48:59 -0400
On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at 10:44am -0400,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer redhat com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19 2012 at 9:52am -0400,
> Spelic <spelic shiftmail org> wrote:
>
> > I do not know what is the mechanism for which xfs cannot unmap
> > blocks from dm-thin, but it really can't.
> > If anyone has dm-thin installed he can try. This is 100%
> > reproducible for me.
>
> I was initially surprised by this considering the thinp-test-suite does
> test a compilebench workload against xfs and ext4 using online discard
> (-o discard).
>
> But I just modified that test to use a thin-pool with 'ignore_discard'
> and the test still passed on both ext4 and xfs.
>
> So there is more work needed in the thinp-test-suite to use blktrace
> hooks to verify that discards are occuring when the compilebench
> generated files are removed.
>
> I'll work through that and report back.
blktrace shows discards for both xfs and ext4.
But in general xfs is issuing discards with much smaller extents than
ext4 does, e.g.:
to the thin device:
+ 128 vs + 32
to the thin-pool's data device:
+ 120 vs + 16
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]