Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 12:45:24 -0700 From: Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> To: Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> Cc: Willem Jan Withagen <wjw@digiware.nl>, freebsd current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: posix_fallocate on ZFS Message-ID: <CAOtMX2jeEHowvTCmBe5=kdArtw9okCd42JmaQnZteidJray_jA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1518291799.32585.228.camel@freebsd.org> References: <1e2f43fd-85da-6629-62d1-6e96790278e5@digiware.nl> <CAOtMX2jZr_kvJgOZWeiB-AZ3-7-uUu%2BUQ3P0nKhGZ0eNRzwMOQ@mail.gmail.com> <1518291799.32585.228.camel@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On Sat, 2018-02-10 at 11:24 -0700, Alan Somers wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 10:28 AM, Willem Jan Withagen > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > This has been disabled on ZFS since last November. > > > And I do understand the rationale on this. > > > > > > BUT > > > > > > I've now upgraded some of my HEAD Ceph test systems and they now fail, > > > since Ceph uses posix_fallocate() to allocate space for the > > > FileStore-journal. > > > > > > Is there any expectation that this is going to fixed in any near > future? > > > > > > --WjW > > > > > No. It's fundamentally impossible to support posix_fallocate on a COW > > filesystem like ZFS. Ceph should be taught to ignore an EINVAL result, > > since the system call is merely advisory. > > > > -Alan > > Unfortunately, posix documents that the function returns EINVAL only > due to bad input parameters, so ignoring that seems like a bad idea. > > Wouldn't it be better if we returned EOPNOTSUP if that's the actual > situation? That could be safely ignored. > I'm afraid you are mistaken. Posix _should've_ required EOPNOTSUP in this, but it actually requires EINVAL. http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/posix_fallocate.html
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAOtMX2jeEHowvTCmBe5=kdArtw9okCd42JmaQnZteidJray_jA>