From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Qu Wenruo <quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Austin S Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@gmail.com>,
"Holger Hoffstätte" <holger.hoffstaette@googlemail.com>,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Automatic balance after mkfs?
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 15:44:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150626134409.GT726@twin.jikos.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <558259F3.8060505@cn.fujitsu.com>
On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 01:41:07PM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
> >>> Yes. It's an artefact of the way that mkfs works. If you run a
> >>> balance on those chunks, they'll go away. (btrfs balance start
> >>> -dusage=0 -musage=0 /mountpoint)
> >>
> >> Since I had to explain this very same thing to a new btrfs-using friend
> >> just yesterday I wondered if it might not make sense for mkfs to issue
> >> a general balance after creating the fs? It should be simple enough
> >> (just issue the balance ioctl?) and not have any negative side effects.
> >>
> >> Just doing such a post-mkfs cleanup automatically would certainly
> >> reduce the number of times we have to explain the this. :)
> >>
> >> Any reasons why we couldn't/shouldn't do this?
> >>
> > Following the same line of thinking, is there any reason we couldn't
> > just rewrite mkfs to get rid of this legacy behavior?
The 'single' blockgroups on multidevice filesystem are considered a bug
in mkfs, an annoying and long running one.
> Compared to the more complex auto balance, rewrite mkfs is a much better
> idea.
Balance is a workaround besides that it requires mouting.
> The original mkfs seems easy for developers, but bad for users.
I'd argue that mkfs is primarily for users.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-06-26 13:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-16 13:13 Automatic balance after mkfs? Holger Hoffstätte
2015-06-16 13:21 ` Austin S Hemmelgarn
2015-06-18 5:41 ` Qu Wenruo
2015-06-26 13:44 ` David Sterba [this message]
2015-06-16 13:24 ` Hugo Mills
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=20150626134409.GT726@twin.jikos.cz \
--to=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=ahferroin7@gmail.com \
--cc=holger.hoffstaette@googlemail.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quwenruo@cn.fujitsu.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.