Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933202AbaFCQb5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 12:31:57 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.24]:55925 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932455AbaFCQbz (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jun 2014 12:31:55 -0400 Message-ID: <538DF836.5000206@ontolinux.com> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2014 18:30:46 +0200 From: Christian Stroetmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.0; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Theodore Ts'o" CC: Dave Chinner , Daniel Phillips , Linux Kernel , Linux FS Devel , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , OGAWA Hirofumi Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] Add a super operation for writeback References: <538B9DEE.20800@phunq.net> <538C360F.7020901@ontolinux.com> <20140603033940.GB14410@dastard> <538D5D78.6040102@ontolinux.com> <20140603145749.GB12890@thunk.org> In-Reply-To: <20140603145749.GB12890@thunk.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:GAYU67xQuV32VFjB3xYvNCK1rsoWDTKsUCYBRYMEd21 rO9GhLelkDfL6xQ3RhNvC6pOvL71Sw7j0fRbdxnAf6J3udwGT3 w5/5dsdQUpPtvQkSI/ZdvRwlTlHhDSKPKUbRoU+kD5mmKizlbR 8FN8ZPw90TAgFhBf1Tn9b5w6Jiw7XVLcZKeclDBIzjGT4oaRHd bj7dad/XFelB6IUrbcxdUwkczjPoKlcsP+fq5sUwVl42z/CHn4 h/opPeJlb5GxTJr/qYkRQQ9ZV8Sj/FERCV2dBEbF/30x0LlfTm OZoxoNofbxbpk7CWdiozOiXroBkgsOu/xIAEfdLFKKq4nu+6Og sI0K8JIa003us8wh3kZw= Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On the 3rd of June 2014 16:57, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 07:30:32AM +0200, Christian Stroetmann wrote: >> In general, I do not believe that the complexity problems of soft updates, >> atomic writes, and related techniques can be solved by hand/manually. So my >> suggestion is to automatically handle the complexity problem of e.g. >> dependancies in a way that is comparable to a(n on-the-fly) file-system >> compiler so to say that works on a very large dependancy graph (having >> several billions of graph vertices actually). And at this point an >> abstraction like it is given with Featherstitch helps to feed and control >> this special FS compiler. > Well, if you want to try to implement something like this, go for it! I am already active since some weeks. > I'd be very curious to see how well (a) how much CPU overhead it takes > to crunch on a dependency graph with billions of vertices, and (b) how > easily can it be to express these dependencies and maintainable such a > dependency language would be. Sounds like a great research topic, and To a) A run is expected to take some few hours on a single computing node. Also, such a graph processing must not be done all the time, but only if a new application demands a specific handling of the data in respect to e.g. one of the ACID criterias. That is the reason why I put "on-the-fly" in paranthesis. To b) I hoped that file system developers could make some suggestions or point to some no-gos. I am also thinking about Petri-Nets in this relation, though it is just an idea. I would also like to mention that it could be used in conjunction with Non-Volatile Memory (NVM) as well. > I'll note the Call For Papers for FAST 2015 is out, and if you can > solve these problems, it would make a great FAST 2015 submission: > > https://www.usenix.org/conference/fast15/call-for-papers Are you serious or have I missed the 1st of April once again? Actually, I could only write a general overview about the approach comparable to a white paper, but nothing more. > Cheers, > > - Ted > Best regards Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/