Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2023 00:54:10 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Martin Matuska <mm@freebsd.org> Cc: John F Carr <jfc@mit.edu>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ZFS txg rollback: expected timeframe? Message-ID: <855504b600b8c6b89b9f13a371954e95@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <2f93493b-a9cc-4c71-848a-efc55751a33e@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAJg7qzHONfMeLUm20OE6Jo5uFLt9bY5VVhbY8z%2BoEVcHYwyoXw@mail.gmail.com> <18B0B6B6-9237-42D0-9FB2-D55CE72E1CCA@mit.edu> <CAJg7qzEnQFUS4v=zYjch3KTySxuErnwC2E5zYTwMB5UkfoTV6g@mail.gmail.com> <e48bfe90cd5e44c28d9656c1ca817bb2@Leidinger.net> <2f93493b-a9cc-4c71-848a-efc55751a33e@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --=_ea40b4d63b8a10e0f54b1bacf0ad3196 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Am 2023-11-04 22:34, schrieb Martin Matuska: > Hi Alexander, > > I am already running block cloning with stable/14 on many production > servers and also on my Ubuntu 23.10 notebook. The referenced issue > appeared way before block cloning was even introduced so that is > unrelated to me. Block cloning is not the same as deduplication. When > copying a file with copy_file_range(2) between two datasets on the same > pool, blocks of data are only referenced instead of doing a real copy. > That is all magic that is being done. Did you check "zpool get > bcloneused,bclonesaved poolname" before re-creating the pool? That > would tell you if any blocks were cloned using block cloning at all. I do not think the referenced issue is what I was seeing as such (as it speaks about the dedup being in use). I don't have any dedup in this pool. I'm aware that block cloning is not the same as dedup, but I think I remember something about having parts of the same tech (different files may reference the same blocks) being used for block cloning with some parts more lightweight than dedup on top. The question here for me is, if the panic message is something which is a valid case for block cloning which can happen and shouldn't create a panic, or not. No, I didn't check those values. But I have the locally modified properties in a file, and the feature block_cloning was active, and not only enabled. So there should have be some cloned blocks. Right now in the re-created pool it is only enabled (as expected). Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF --=_ea40b4d63b8a10e0f54b1bacf0ad3196 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc; size=833 Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEER9UlYXp1PSd08nWXEg2wmwP42IYFAmVG2bAACgkQEg2wmwP4 2IZoRA//fi+oYyV7XBVndgTghBxHYNP4wg4wzu3qlVyy4kH1QTVeLLxOwe/EswGv SyzfXZKWC+t8up5KhPW2I8N3U6f2Z3CKDkIw5/8eKJb6rLNONJEfEytNecPpRGIy MMMqL1Ve58xVEmFuvhouC8mAR4ScRoSvQCnOXtZXR1angdKmMwuAEeCuXzZqHNyR UJGdlaeNteUWiNOFkdWIiklEFNng6k/Od92EeiI+UmVZ7ciJT0++8iAlf3TIckBj ZBLFJSw0sy5wbYYCVDTYgW8v0WKLmAw4rMRAZ41o9BnQCgz86BdYi20548Tb/rmN PzJPKuJu3vXSCuRM4gzgNGBpW1NoiE5q6kOyUPO4HOeqTT9b7Uj5FmGt+Tpl1mTf gZFFHwFpm3pai+yonqXY8WLSS/LCXPaRpG6HN/Xik7WDUMPP6eB/NL1VRTVX5zai +z2dDmzLa1tuDCYhvp4wpNQZ3XaFDyv+GyguNFmSAhlYwJf2+Yrc/5lT159ZcCHj DNlMg5sl6DZqaZPQp7wwtwiL9sKyjv4x8AM1RErEn4SkAdaY5xS2zvT9s0bVBFJI M/wsN83i+3XlJGbvzfxTRU/eOjB2LNoe3g3FExeYYNOzjPJ9LbDoD/j/q5gzpndM vRT/aWirO0wL03+6VhNbRNFMYLDUhEgXm0yf/hM9e66vJyut6Ww= =FOEX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_ea40b4d63b8a10e0f54b1bacf0ad3196--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?855504b600b8c6b89b9f13a371954e95>