Re: Horrible ftruncate performance

[Chris Mason <mason@suse.com>]

On Fri, 2003-07-11 at 11:44, Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2003 at 05:34:12PM +0200, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> 
> > > Actually I did it already, as data-logging patches can be applied to
> > > 2.4.22-pre3 (where this truncate patch was included).
> > > > Maybe it _IS_ time for this _AND_ all the other data-logging patches?
> > > > 2.4.22-pre5?
> > > It's Chris turn. I thought it is good idea to test in -ac first, though
> > > (even taking into account that these patches are part of SuSE's stock
> > > kernels).
> > Well, I don't think that testing in -ac is necessary at all in this case.
> 
> May be not. But it is still useful ;)
> 
> > I am using WOLK on many production machines with ReiserFS mostly as Fileserver 
> > (hundred of gigabytes) and proxy caches.
> 
> I am using this code on my production server myself ;)
> 
> > If someone would ask me: Go for 2.4 mainline inclusion w/o going via -ac! :)
> 
> Chris should decide (and Marcelo should agree) (Actually Chris thought it is good
> idea to submit data-logging to Marcelo now, too). I have no objections.
> Also now, that quota v2 code is in place, even quota code can be included.
> 
> Also it would be great to port this stuff to 2.5 (yes, I know Chris wants this to be in 2.4 first)

Marcelo seems to like being really conservative on this point, and I
don't have a problem with Oleg's original idea to just do relocation in
2.4.22 and the full data logging in 2.4.23-pre4 (perhaps +quota now that
32 bit quota support is in there).

2.5 porting work has restarted at last, Oleg's really been helpful with
keeping the 2.4 stuff up to date.

-chris