[Gluster-devel] Issues with fallocate, discard and zerofill
M. Mohan Kumar
mohan at in.ibm.com
Fri Sep 6 05:28:45 UTC 2013
Anand Avati <anand.avati at gmail.com> writes:
Its possible to overload writev FOP for achieving zerofill
functionality. Is there any open issues with this zerofill functionality
even after overloading in writev?
> Is this in reference to the dht open file rebalance (of replaying the
> operations to the destination server)? I am assuming so, as that is
> something which has to be handled.
> The other question is how should fallocate/discard be handled by self-heal
> in AFR. I'm not sure how important it is, but will be certainly good to
> bounce some ideas off here. Maybe we should implement a fiemap fop to query
> extents/holes and replay them in the other serverl?
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Bharata B Rao <bharata.rao at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Hi Avati, Brian,
>> During the recently held gluster meetup, Shishir mentioned about a
>> potential problem (related to fd migration etc) in the zerofill
>> implementation (http://review.gluster.org/#/c/5327/) and also
>> mentioned that same/similar issues are present with fallocate and
>> discard implementations. Since zerofill has been modelled on
>> fallocate/discard, I was wondering if it would be possible to address
>> these issues in fallocate/discard first so that we could potentially
>> follow the same in zerofill implementation.
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel at nongnu.org
More information about the Gluster-devel