Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757021AbZDCJd3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 05:33:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753441AbZDCJdU (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 05:33:20 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:34605 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752608AbZDCJdT (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Apr 2009 05:33:19 -0400 Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2009 11:33:16 +0200 From: Jan Kara To: Alexander Larsson Cc: eparis@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Issues with using fanotify for a filesystem indexer Message-ID: <20090403093316.GA18569@duck.suse.cz> References: <1238158043.23703.20.camel@fatty> <20090402145457.GA17275@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <1238689744.5704.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090402165023.GG3010@duck.suse.cz> <1238692537.5704.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090402195253.GH3010@duck.suse.cz> <1238741043.31635.2.camel@fatty> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1238741043.31635.2.camel@fatty> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1808 Lines: 38 On Fri 03-04-09 08:44:03, Alexander Larsson wrote: > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 21:52 +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > On Thu 02-04-09 19:15:37, Alexander Larsson wrote: > > > Ah, I see. The indexer sets the flag. > > > I see some issues. First of all, writing the flag/mtime to disk seems > > > like a bad idea. It'll cause a lot of writing when the indexer recurses > > > throught the filesystem, similar to atimes. But, if you're not > > > > There's some cost but it's not nearly as bad as with atimes. > True, its not as bad as atimes. But it still does some writes, and > writes seem to affect i/o performance more than low prio reads from the > indexer. I'm very wary about the background indexer process disturbing > the foreground processes. This is one of the main problems with current > indexers. I agree - that's why I have beagle turned off on my system ;) > > > persisting the flag/mtime then you need to keep all the dentries with > > > the flag set in memory, which has resource use risks similar to > > > unbounded event queues. > > Ah, true - I have implemented just the persistent case and have not > > thought too much about the non-persistent one. You're right that it won't > > work because we'd pin memory. > > So, where do you persist the flag/time? Is there some availible space in > the inode for it on ext3/4? Yes, there's enough space in ext3/ext4 inode. I've already talked about it with Ted and other fs developers at Plumbers Conf. and they weren't opposed to such change. Honza -- Jan Kara SUSE Labs, CR -- 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/