On Mon, 2004-05-31 at 12:48, Hans Reiser wrote:Ok, this qualifies as bug fixing or close enough.;-)
While I like and appreciate the data journaling stuff, and I think it should go in, real soon now I think we should avoid adding new features to V3. Let the mission critical server folks have a reiserfs version that only gets bug fixes added to it, and let V4 be for those who want excitement.
Are there any things which Chris and Jeff think should go in besides data journaling/ordering and bitmap algorithm changes?
We've got io error fault tolerance that needs to go in after the barrier
code has stabilized.
I can't promise that I'll never making anotherOk.
change in there, but my goal is to keep them to a minimum.
Also, I would like to see some serious benchmarks of the bitmap algorithm changes before they go in. They seem nice in theory, and some users liked them for their uses, but that does not make a serious scientific study. Such a study has a high chance of making them even better.;-)
Some benchmarks have been posted on reiserfs-list, but I'd love to
coordinate with you on getting some mongo numbers.
I can spout off aV4 performance is not at a stable point at the moment I think, I have not been monitoring things closely due to trying to earn bucks consulting, and performance did not get tested every week, but there have been reports of performance decreasing and no reports of anyone investigating it, so I need to....
long list of places where the code does better then the original v3
allocator, but that's because those were the ones I was trying to fix
;-)
zam, I view you as the block allocator maintainer, please review that bitmap code from Chris.
Chris and Jeff, can you propose a benchmarking plan for the bitmap code?
A good start would be to just rebenchmark against v4.
-chris