Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 16 Nov 2018 08:27:35 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        fs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 233245] [UFS] Softupdates fails to track dependency between appended data and i_size
Message-ID:  <bug-233245-3630-gh95n7LMqj@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-233245-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-233245-3630@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D233245

Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kib@FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #3 from Konstantin Belousov <kib@FreeBSD.org> ---
Of course I sympathize the idea of improving the user experience, but IMO t=
he
cost of the code complexity is more important there.

SU, from my prospective, were never supposed to provide the user data
consistency guarantees. The goal was/is only the metadata sanity, even not =
the
guarantee that on-disk metadata actually matches some state during the syst=
em
operation.  We never track user data block writes ordering, so whatever sta=
te
user data is left after the crash, is the user issue.

>From this PoV, file size increase by hole vs. increase by the actual conten=
t is
not under the SU scope.  Again, to make my opinion clear: I would not objec=
t,
but SU are already insanely complex and we must not increase the complexity
just because we can.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-233245-3630-gh95n7LMqj>