From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
To: Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>
Cc: Daniel Taylor <Daniel.Taylor@wdc.com>,
Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@mikefedyk.com>,
Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@gmail.com>,
Mat <jackdachef@gmail.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
The development of BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Btrfs: broken file system design (was Unbound(?) internal fragmentation in Btrfs)
Date: Sat, 26 Jun 2010 07:55:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C25EAC4.1040909@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C258D91.6010308@msgid.tls.msk.ru>
On 06/26/2010 01:18 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 25.06.2010 22:58, Ric Wheeler wrote:
>
>> On 06/24/2010 06:06 PM, Daniel Taylor wrote:
>>
> []
>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Daniel Taylor
>>>> <Daniel.Taylor@wdc.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Just an FYI reminder. The original test (2K files) is utterly
>>>>> pathological for disk drives with 4K physical sectors, such as
>>>>> those now shipping from WD, Seagate, and others. Some of the
>>>>> SSDs have larger (16K0 or smaller blocks (2K). There is also
>>>>> the issue of btrfs over RAID (which I know is not entirely
>>>>> sensible, but which will happen).
>>>>>
> Why it is not sensible to use btrfs on raid devices?
> Nowadays raid is just everywhere, from 'fakeraid' on AHCI to
> large external arrays on iSCSI-attached storage. Sometimes
> it is nearly imposisble to _not_ use RAID, -- many servers
> comes with a built-in RAID card which can't be turned off or
> disabled. And hardware raid is faster (at least in theory)
> at least because it puts less load on various system busses.
>
> To many "enterprise folks" a statement "we don't need hw raid,
> we have better solution" sounds like "we're just a toy, don't
> use".
>
> Hmm? ;)
>
> /mjt, who always used and preferred _software_ raid due to
> multiple reasons, and never used btrfs so far.
>
Absolutely no reason that you would not use btrfs on hardware raid
volumes (or software RAID for that matter).
Ric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-26 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-03 14:58 Unbound(?) internal fragmentation in Btrfs Edward Shishkin
2010-06-17 23:29 ` Mat
2010-06-18 8:03 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-06-18 13:32 ` Btrfs: broken file system design (was Unbound(?) internal fragmentation in Btrfs) Edward Shishkin
2010-06-18 13:45 ` Daniel J Blueman
2010-06-18 16:50 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-23 23:40 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-24 3:43 ` Daniel Taylor
2010-06-24 4:51 ` Mike Fedyk
2010-06-24 22:06 ` Daniel Taylor
2010-06-25 9:15 ` Btrfs: broken file system design Andi Kleen
2010-06-25 18:58 ` Btrfs: broken file system design (was Unbound(?) internal fragmentation in Btrfs) Ric Wheeler
2010-06-26 5:18 ` Michael Tokarev
2010-06-26 11:55 ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
[not found] ` <57784.2001:5c0:82dc::2.1277555665.squirrel@www.tofubar.com>
2010-06-26 13:47 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-06-24 9:50 ` David Woodhouse
2010-06-18 18:15 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-06-18 13:47 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-18 15:05 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-18 15:10 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-18 16:22 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-18 18:10 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-18 15:21 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-06-18 15:22 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-18 15:56 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-18 19:25 ` Christian Stroetmann
2010-06-18 19:29 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-18 19:35 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-18 22:04 ` Balancing leaves when walking from top to down (was Btrfs:...) Edward Shishkin
2010-06-18 22:16 ` Ric Wheeler
2010-06-19 0:03 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-21 13:15 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-21 18:00 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-22 14:12 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-22 14:20 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-23 13:46 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-23 23:37 ` Jamie Lokier
2010-06-24 13:06 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-30 20:05 ` Edward Shishkin
2010-06-30 21:12 ` Chris Mason
2010-06-23 23:57 ` Btrfs: broken file system design (was Unbound(?) internal fragmentation in Btrfs) Jamie Lokier
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=4C25EAC4.1040909@redhat.com \
--to=rwheeler@redhat.com \
--cc=Daniel.Taylor@wdc.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=daniel.blueman@gmail.com \
--cc=jackdachef@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfedyk@mikefedyk.com \
--cc=mjt@tls.msk.ru \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).