From: Alberto Bursi <bobafetthotmail@gmail.com>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com>,
dsterba@suse.cz, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: More intelligent degraded chunk allocator
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 13:18:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f8602f1e-7401-dfd7-0274-48609e3804b1@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f6dfede7-c65c-2321-ab8f-ba16a6a3c71f@gmx.com>
On 19/11/19 07:32, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>
> On 2019/11/19 上午4:18, David Sterba wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 02:27:07PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
>>> This patchset will make btrfs degraded mount more intelligent and
>>> provide more consistent profile keeping function.
>>>
>>> One of the most problematic aspect of degraded mount is, btrfs may
>>> create unwanted profiles.
>>>
>>> # mkfs.btrfs -f /dev/test/scratch[12] -m raid1 -d raid1
>>> # wipefs -fa /dev/test/scratch2
>>> # mount -o degraded /dev/test/scratch1 /mnt/btrfs
>>> # fallocate -l 1G /mnt/btrfs/foobar
>>> # btrfs ins dump-tree -t chunk /dev/test/scratch1
>>> item 7 key (FIRST_CHUNK_TREE CHUNK_ITEM 1674575872) itemoff 15511 itemsize 80
>>> length 536870912 owner 2 stripe_len 65536 type DATA
>>> New data chunk will fallback to SINGLE or DUP.
>>>
>>>
>>> The cause is pretty simple, when mounted degraded, missing devices can't
>>> be used for chunk allocation.
>>> Thus btrfs has to fall back to SINGLE profile.
>>>
>>> This patchset will make btrfs to consider missing devices as last resort if
>>> current rw devices can't fulfil the profile request.
>>>
>>> This should provide a good balance between considering all missing
>>> device as RW and completely ruling out missing devices (current mainline
>>> behavior).
>> Thanks. This is going to change the behaviour with a missing device, so
>> the question is if we should make this configurable first and then
>> switch the default.
> Configurable then switch makes sense for most cases, but for this
> degraded chunk case, IIRC the new behavior is superior in all cases.
>
> For 2 devices RAID1 with one missing device (the main concern), old
> behavior will create SINGLE/DUP chunk, which has no tolerance for extra
> missing devices.
>
> The new behavior will create degraded RAID1, which still lacks tolerance
> for extra missing devices.
>
> The difference is, for degraded chunk, if we have the device back, and
> do proper scrub, then we're completely back to proper RAID1.
> No need to do extra balance/convert, only scrub is needed.
>
> So the new behavior is kinda of a super set of old behavior, using the
> new behavior by default should not cause extra concern.
I think most users will see this as a bug fix, as the current behavior
of creating
SINGLE chunks is very annoying and can cause confusion as it is NOT an
expected behavior for a classic (mdadm or hardware) degraded RAID array.
-Alberto
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-19 5:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-07 6:27 [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: More intelligent degraded chunk allocator Qu Wenruo
2019-11-07 6:27 ` [PATCH 1/3] btrfs: volumes: Refactor device holes gathering into a separate function Qu Wenruo
2019-11-07 9:20 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-11-07 9:33 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-07 9:45 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-11-07 6:27 ` [PATCH 2/3] btrfs: volumes: Add btrfs_fs_devices::missing_list to collect missing devices Qu Wenruo
2019-11-07 9:31 ` Johannes Thumshirn
2019-11-19 10:03 ` Anand Jain
2019-11-19 10:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-27 19:36 ` David Sterba
2019-11-07 6:27 ` [PATCH 3/3] btrfs: volumes: Allocate degraded chunks if rw devices can't fullfil a chunk Qu Wenruo
2019-11-19 10:05 ` Anand Jain
2019-11-19 10:41 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-27 19:23 ` David Sterba
2019-11-27 23:36 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-28 11:24 ` David Sterba
2019-11-28 12:29 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-28 12:30 ` Qu WenRuo
2019-11-28 12:39 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-18 20:18 ` [PATCH 0/3] btrfs: More intelligent degraded chunk allocator David Sterba
2019-11-18 23:32 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-11-19 5:18 ` Alberto Bursi [this message]
2019-11-27 19:26 ` David Sterba
2019-12-02 3:22 ` Zygo Blaxell
2019-12-02 4:41 ` Qu Wenruo
2019-12-02 19:27 ` Zygo Blaxell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=f8602f1e-7401-dfd7-0274-48609e3804b1@gmail.com \
--to=bobafetthotmail@gmail.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo.btrfs@gmx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).