From: Jeff Garzik Subject: Re: [RFC] Ext3 online defrag Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:33:06 -0400 Message-ID: <20061025183306.GF19513@havoc.gtf.org> References: <20061024041433.GB12506@havoc.gtf.org> <20061024135928.GB11034@melbourne.sgi.com> <20061024194416.GB16087@thunk.org> <20061024230020.GZ3509@schatzie.adilger.int> <20061025145450.GF21082@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20061025170224.GB19513@havoc.gtf.org> <20061025175851.GA9940@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> <20061025180821.GE19513@havoc.gtf.org> <20061025182530.GC9940@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: adilger@clusterfs.com, Theodore Tso , David Chinner , Alex Tomas , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Return-path: To: Jan Kara Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061025182530.GC9940@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 08:25:30PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > I see. So you mean that in our ext3meta filesystem we'd have a file > named "add_this_extent_to_inode" and a file "reloc_inode_interval" and > they'd be fed essentially the same info as the current ioctl interface and > do the same thing as we currently do. Hmm, I don't find it that nice any > more but yes, this would work. It depends on the operation. ext2meta[1] works fine for online defrag, just exporting metadata objects and providing read(1) and write(2) operations on them. Adding 'trigger' files (like your add_this_extent_to_inode) may make sense for some operations, indeed, but we need to see the whole picture before really understanding whether that interface is optimal. Jeff [1] http://linux.yyz.us/misc/ext2meta.c