From nobody Sat Nov 4 09:01:34 2023 X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4SMs6p2w90z50n4l for ; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 09:01:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald@FreeBSD.org) Received: from smtp.freebsd.org (smtp.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::24b:4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.freebsd.org", Issuer "R3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SMs6p2NRYz4dnt; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 09:01:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1699088498; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XmwbxoPrF+LVLjabkXwk1bXxCsB94DTO6d+va/8nJs4=; b=jL9VNDi3YUTUsAdUm2fU2gmDweEJjE8W+icdux6J57qoZv6IHxxCGdSJ+/qmeWhd7IpSNg 4VBNG6EkMuuzEcDSoy3OoFkzzn7Wqkh+fiT1rMDxmSSjMYbQ13PPHwKdffzntBMzJVhBvq FpRH0I1W9dpTfENAUTxjsvES0j3YuHR1zMcKpsRTb6CsrEMOCzZgq8QFopu8+4TTW4FAI2 ybgR9yvNZkaxtYM8W+f+kU9tkaRWtuvRo/CdZON1X9WosN491zaG7/HCK5GvjnaNdtG4r3 a1/bZjBw+pgNMB7SuOE9dJ/z8JZuZQ2MVKTMP3VJZRI5qbIgUgiysTJ2aWx+eA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=freebsd.org; s=dkim; t=1699088498; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XmwbxoPrF+LVLjabkXwk1bXxCsB94DTO6d+va/8nJs4=; b=lLh7RcYvnAFI24a9HjmPQ+joGMuEAF3tZgMoOUY1abk9iVpIb/RBAHZcL/Z0rot7nJj8bI 9HidNeWWIb/i/kA9lwQWRcjWtesyRx7X1+RAQklnEc/7Uc6d7KrG638owdZlcrM/RU3XTV GYgru7FfTb1WqdV++YlA/HtChmRsdKi3LP1fW2vP88H5wQr6lQuE8KjL8USD4JYQapSPbW XBsockWmmPSKuhWeZfPPGdlcXR9+F0K3kit0F3Mnu2BVrOxLbbEwisrjCae2gHnnCh0CSw I4io+aVzRHxGkPEXCQLEQue366HdVDQcwck73+fju5dnvHP6ThmXcjoPbkRCrg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx1.freebsd.org; none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=dkim; d=freebsd.org; t=1699088498; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=xToy94oBG4YKtQie/JMRvG3U2T8Q0+ACiGlBCAU530yhV99XO+eHibvEVn3vTY9DhTi4He CsNiBW+7Ny7RLRmLwWkEjfFegSmMU5e/uoonJLbebcvgaUiPA44losU/CWx5+bcewboL1Z ZC3SfeTR8TuKM8Stjskr4mJKQvVbWYoyUkVYGiMmc2WAIZh0e2UGL0PtoYSReldtqsrxn3 +chZwhW8UT6vsq7tVcRqI9nyARj9TEKsTkML/V4fMzoeHuSbXRrl7iYNDZM1RWziCoYhUo c4YOjzrSfieH6tSE9YqDmENxpPxqyyLvH4o5/tiJ1uLexIXeJ+huaoVjXj81Eg== Received: from [192.168.1.109] (84-105-120-103.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [84.105.120.103]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: ronald/mail) by smtp.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4SMs6n4gzlz1CdD; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 09:01:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ronald@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <7a906956-6836-421e-b25e-ff701369e3ed@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2023 10:01:34 +0100 List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-stable List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Is 14.0 to released based on 0 for sysctl vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled ? To: Mark Millard , FreeBSD-STABLE Mailing List References: <2F81D978-7DBD-42CE-8ECF-C020B0CB5C29.ref@yahoo.com> <2F81D978-7DBD-42CE-8ECF-C020B0CB5C29@yahoo.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Ronald Klop In-Reply-To: <2F81D978-7DBD-42CE-8ECF-C020B0CB5C29@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 11/4/23 02:39, Mark Millard wrote: > It looks to me like releng/14.0 (as of 14.0-RC4) still has: > > int zfs_bclone_enabled; > SYSCTL_INT(_vfs_zfs, OID_AUTO, bclone_enabled, CTLFLAG_RWTUN, > &zfs_bclone_enabled, 0, "Enable block cloning"); > > leaving block cloning effectively disabled by default, no > matter what the pool has enabled. > > https://www.freebsd.org/releases/14.0R/relnotes/ also reports: > > QUOTE > OpenZFS has been upgraded to version 2.2. New features include: > • > block cloning, which allows shallow copies of blocks in file copies. This is optional, and disabled by default; it can be enabled with sysctl vfs.zfs.bclone_enabled=1. > END QUOTE > I think this answers your question in the subject. > Just curiousity on my part about the default completeness of > openzfs-2.2 support, not an objection either way. > I haven't seen new issues with block cloning in the last few weeks mentioned on the mailing lists. All known issues are fixed AFAIK. But I can imagine that the risk+effect ratio of data corruption is seen as a bit too high for a 14.0 release for this particular feature. That does not diminish the rest of the completeness of openzfs-2.2. NB: I'm not involved in developing openzfs or the decision making in the release. Just repeating what I read on the lists. Regards, Ronald. > > === > Mark Millard > marklmi at yahoo.com > >