Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Ric Wheeler]

On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd certainly
> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>
> Generally would like to talk about...
>
> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism may
> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>
> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>
> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
> setup for storage&  filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>
> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
>
> Thanks,
> -Eric
>    

I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.

Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have 
tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work properly.

Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can 
get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits in 
time :-)

ric

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Sorin Faibish]

On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 13:33:06 -0500, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>  
wrote:

> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd  
>> certainly
>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>>
>> Generally would like to talk about...
>>
>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch  
>> mechanism may
>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>>
>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>>
>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
>> setup for storage&  filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>>
>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
Why just sanity. We can also talk about the new cache writeback techniques
FS metadata specific as well as application dirty pages to improve  
performance
of large sequential write NFS workloads.


>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Eric
>>
>
> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
>
> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have  
> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work  
> properly.
>
> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can  
> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits in  
> time :-)
>
> ric
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel"  
> in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
>



-- 
Best Regards
Sorin Faibish
Corporate Distinguished Engineer
Network Storage Group

        EMC²
where information lives

Phone: 508-435-1000 x 48545
Cellphone: 617-510-0422
Email : sfaibish@emc.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Jeff Moyer]

Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com> writes:

> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd certainly
>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>>
>> Generally would like to talk about...
>>
>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism may
>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>>
>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>>
>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
>> setup for storage&  filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>>
>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Eric
>>    
>
> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
>
> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have
> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work
> properly.
>
> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can
> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits
> in time :-)

As you know, I've been picking away at the discard support from the file
system all the way down to the storage.  I think I should have some good
numbers and guidance come time for the workshop.

I am also interested in discussing all things I/O scheduler.

Oh, and I'd like to attend as well.  ;)

-Jeff

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Ric Wheeler]

On 03/02/2010 08:37 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>  writes:
>
>    
>> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>      
>>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd certainly
>>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>>>
>>> Generally would like to talk about...
>>>
>>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism may
>>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>>>
>>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>>>
>>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
>>> setup for storage&   filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>>>
>>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Eric
>>>
>>>        
>> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
>>
>> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have
>> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work
>> properly.
>>
>> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can
>> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits
>> in time :-)
>>      
> As you know, I've been picking away at the discard support from the file
> system all the way down to the storage.  I think I should have some good
> numbers and guidance come time for the workshop.
>
> I am also interested in discussing all things I/O scheduler.
>
> Oh, and I'd like to attend as well.  ;)
>
> -Jeff
>    
One topic that I think that might be interesting is to talk about how 
well we did integrating all of these new features into the stack that 
cross IO/FS/scheduler boundaries. In a way, we got ahead of the hardware 
vendors with both the discard support and the various topology bits but 
did manage to get that supported not just in the kernel but up the tool 
chain as well.

Might be interesting to see where we ended up, think about next steps 
and if/how we would improve on what we have....

ric

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Mike Snitzer]

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/2010 08:37 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>>
>> Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>  writes:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd
>>>> certainly
>>>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>>>>
>>>> Generally would like to talk about...
>>>>
>>>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism
>>>> may
>>>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>>>>
>>>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>>>>
>>>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
>>>> setup for storage&   filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>>>>
>>>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> -Eric
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
>>>
>>> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have
>>> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work
>>> properly.
>>>
>>> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can
>>> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits
>>> in time :-)
>>>
>>
>> As you know, I've been picking away at the discard support from the file
>> system all the way down to the storage.  I think I should have some good
>> numbers and guidance come time for the workshop.
>>
>> I am also interested in discussing all things I/O scheduler.
>>
>> Oh, and I'd like to attend as well.  ;)
>>
>> -Jeff
>>
>
> One topic that I think that might be interesting is to talk about how well
> we did integrating all of these new features into the stack that cross
> IO/FS/scheduler boundaries. In a way, we got ahead of the hardware vendors
> with both the discard support and the various topology bits but did manage
> to get that supported not just in the kernel but up the tool chain as well.
>
> Might be interesting to see where we ended up, think about next steps and
> if/how we would improve on what we have....

I would like attend this year's LSF.

I helped implement and coordinate the development of the I/O Topology
support through the entire storage stack.  My specific contribution
was in DM and LVM2 but I also worked with Martin Petersen and the
developers of the layers above the block layer (partition tools,
filesystems, virtio+qemu).

I'm now looking to implement comprehensive discard support for DM.
There is a need for various discard support changes in the block layer
(and below) so it'd be interesting if we touched on this.  But my hope
is that at least some patches will make their way upstream before LSF
(for 2.6.36 inclusion) -- e.g.: hch's patches to push a discard's
payload allocation down to the LLD (SCSI or ATA).

I'll also be prepared to discuss aspects of DM if there is any interest.

Mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[Ric Wheeler]

On 06/17/2010 09:46 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>  wrote:
>    
>> On 03/02/2010 08:37 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
>>      
>>> Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>    writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>>>> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd
>>>>> certainly
>>>>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
>>>>>
>>>>> Generally would like to talk about...
>>>>>
>>>>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism
>>>>> may
>>>>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
>>>>>
>>>>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
>>>>> setup for storage&     filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> -Eric
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
>>>>
>>>> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have
>>>> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work
>>>> properly.
>>>>
>>>> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can
>>>> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits
>>>> in time :-)
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> As you know, I've been picking away at the discard support from the file
>>> system all the way down to the storage.  I think I should have some good
>>> numbers and guidance come time for the workshop.
>>>
>>> I am also interested in discussing all things I/O scheduler.
>>>
>>> Oh, and I'd like to attend as well.  ;)
>>>
>>> -Jeff
>>>
>>>        
>> One topic that I think that might be interesting is to talk about how well
>> we did integrating all of these new features into the stack that cross
>> IO/FS/scheduler boundaries. In a way, we got ahead of the hardware vendors
>> with both the discard support and the various topology bits but did manage
>> to get that supported not just in the kernel but up the tool chain as well.
>>
>> Might be interesting to see where we ended up, think about next steps and
>> if/how we would improve on what we have....
>>      
> I would like attend this year's LSF.
>
> I helped implement and coordinate the development of the I/O Topology
> support through the entire storage stack.  My specific contribution
> was in DM and LVM2 but I also worked with Martin Petersen and the
> developers of the layers above the block layer (partition tools,
> filesystems, virtio+qemu).
>
> I'm now looking to implement comprehensive discard support for DM.
> There is a need for various discard support changes in the block layer
> (and below) so it'd be interesting if we touched on this.  But my hope
> is that at least some patches will make their way upstream before LSF
> (for 2.6.36 inclusion) -- e.g.: hch's patches to push a discard's
> payload allocation down to the LLD (SCSI or ATA).
>
> I'll also be prepared to discuss aspects of DM if there is any interest.
>
> Mike
>    

I think that these are all great topics - getting discard finished for 
DM will be an important goal for the coming year (especially given the 
huge surge in SSD devices that really, really can start to use this !!!)

ric

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] I'd like to attend ;)

[James Bottomley]

On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 09:56 -0400, Ric Wheeler wrote:
> On 06/17/2010 09:46 AM, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 9:40 AM, Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>  wrote:
> >    
> >> On 03/02/2010 08:37 AM, Jeff Moyer wrote:
> >>      
> >>> Ric Wheeler<rwheeler@redhat.com>    writes:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>        
> >>>> On 03/01/2010 01:07 PM, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>          
> >>>>> I still need to decide which specific topic to bring/promote, but I'd
> >>>>> certainly
> >>>>> like to attend, as I have in the past.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Generally would like to talk about...
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Trim/discard plans in filesystem - lately I'm thinking a batch mechanism
> >>>>> may
> >>>>> be better than trim-as-you-go.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Advancements in generic test infrastructures since last year.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Could talk a bit about the advancements in proper alignment detection&
> >>>>> setup for storage&     filesystems but that's not a very big topic.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jan's suggestion of some writeback sanity sounds good to me too.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> -Eric
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>            
> >>>> I think that all of the above are great topics for this time around.
> >>>>
> >>>> Specifically, the alignment work has been interesting in that we have
> >>>> tried to get not just the kernel bits but the entire stack to work
> >>>> properly.
> >>>>
> >>>> Both this and the discard work should still be quite topical if we can
> >>>> get the various storage vendors to evaluate our current upstream bits
> >>>> in time :-)
> >>>>
> >>>>          
> >>> As you know, I've been picking away at the discard support from the file
> >>> system all the way down to the storage.  I think I should have some good
> >>> numbers and guidance come time for the workshop.
> >>>
> >>> I am also interested in discussing all things I/O scheduler.
> >>>
> >>> Oh, and I'd like to attend as well.  ;)
> >>>
> >>> -Jeff
> >>>
> >>>        
> >> One topic that I think that might be interesting is to talk about how well
> >> we did integrating all of these new features into the stack that cross
> >> IO/FS/scheduler boundaries. In a way, we got ahead of the hardware vendors
> >> with both the discard support and the various topology bits but did manage
> >> to get that supported not just in the kernel but up the tool chain as well.
> >>
> >> Might be interesting to see where we ended up, think about next steps and
> >> if/how we would improve on what we have....
> >>      
> > I would like attend this year's LSF.
> >
> > I helped implement and coordinate the development of the I/O Topology
> > support through the entire storage stack.  My specific contribution
> > was in DM and LVM2 but I also worked with Martin Petersen and the
> > developers of the layers above the block layer (partition tools,
> > filesystems, virtio+qemu).
> >
> > I'm now looking to implement comprehensive discard support for DM.
> > There is a need for various discard support changes in the block layer
> > (and below) so it'd be interesting if we touched on this.  But my hope
> > is that at least some patches will make their way upstream before LSF
> > (for 2.6.36 inclusion) -- e.g.: hch's patches to push a discard's
> > payload allocation down to the LLD (SCSI or ATA).
> >
> > I'll also be prepared to discuss aspects of DM if there is any interest.
> >
> > Mike
> >    
> 
> I think that these are all great topics - getting discard finished for 
> DM will be an important goal for the coming year (especially given the 
> huge surge in SSD devices that really, really can start to use this !!!)

Just a procedural note: Since I'm compiling the list of attendee request
list, replying to someone else's request is not such a good idea because
I went by the thread heads when I did it ...

James

Re: [Lsf10-pc] [ATTEND] i'd like to attend!

[Ric Wheeler]

On 04/14/2010 09:20 PM, Sage Weil wrote:
> I don't have any urgent matters to discuss, but I would definitely like to
> attend again this year.  A few miscellaneous items:
>
> - I'd like to resurrect the 'statlite' proposal from the last lsf (with
> patches, real soon now)
>
> - Generic interface for describing file striping for distributed file
> systems (e.g. allowing easy data migration between ceph and lustre)
>
> - I'm interested in the vfs scalability work, as some of that will affect
> some tomfoolery in ceph's dentry cache usage
>
> - I'm also interested in hear more about developments with the storage
> side of things, now that we've built a distributed block device using
> ceph's distributed object storage layer.
>
> Thanks!
> sage
>    

Thanks Sage for the submission.

I think that your work on ceph and btrfs has been interesting and think 
that the ideas you list above are definitely worth discussing at LSF!

Ric