►
From YouTube: CDS Jewel -- RADOS metadata-only journal mode
A
B
A
cash
please
refer
to
a
blueprint,
and
it's
a
detailed
description
of
our
idea
so
currently
receive
community
is
single
for
eliminating
the
average
penalty.
No
practical
value
store
is
a
crystalline
defects,
great
and
depend
operation
scene
and
copulate
with
well
keeping
all
the
original
sieve
sieve
cymatics.
So
this
makes
the
news,
though,
a
general-purpose
optimization
for
especially
suitable
photos
like
right
when
scenarios
and
for
our
metadata
on
a
jeweler
model
way
intended
to
tool
in
the
more
aggressive
way.
That
is
where
we
we
don't.
We
don't
turn
off
to
the
data
at
all.
B
B
Data
modification
since
followed
for
disco
cymatics
for
the
block
device
emetics,
it's
happy
with
either
old
or
new
content
on
an
interrupter
right
with
only
the
maintain
the
optimistic,
optimization
and
another
use
case
is
those
imaginary
situations,
for
example,
is
pitched
harem,
while
veggie
coupe
catch
pool
has
already
provided
the
durability.
So
when
turkey
objects
are
out
a
flashed
back,
I
flashed
back
into
the
baseball
this
year
will
Cherie.
Theoretically
little
ought
to
sue
the
journaling
of
the
baseball,
since
the
flashy
could
always
will
be
played
on
the
write
operation.
B
Another
situation
is
like
the
match
for
optical
transactions,
oppose
the
will
complete
thread,
so,
in
that
case
ooh
we
can
also
skip
through
the
aperture
ring
penalty,
so
helpful
for
root
cases
and
the
metadata.
Only
the
journal
made
a
data
only
journal
mode
to
some
extent
resembles
the
data
equal
to
other
journal
model
in
ext4.
Who
is
this
action?
Ahmad
Israel
to
data
are
right
and
directly
to
their
ultimate
location,
when
theta
rating
finish
to
metadata
are
ready
into
the
general
SEO.
B
So
it's
actually
kind
is
the
consistency
in
terms
of
food
of
a
dose
Ling
space
and
the
data
consistency
among
the
of
all
the
object
copies.
Just
in
some
very
rare
cases.
The
object
data
may
not
be
correct
internal
correct.
We
think
they're
made
and
some
old
data
fixed
with
some
some
new
new
data.
Okay.
B
So
this
is
the
motivation
for
implementation.
We
have
200
s
and
we
have
two
options:
the
first
option,
so
we
each
makes
the
mini
motivation
for
a
current
front
front
work.
So
just
we
devise
good
and
the
current
implementation
of
the
write
operation
into
three
steps.
Now,
it's
like
in
two
steps,
we
add
a
one
step
so
will
write
the
object
data
first,
the
directed
to
the
ultimate
location.
B
So,
for
a
second
step,
we
commit
the
metadata
to
journal
as
you
and
our
factories
will
deflect
or
either
case
rulers
lives
so
with
when
the
master,
the
master
at.
How
do
the
swing
and
to
some
it's,
the
weather
data
letÃs
apply
the
metadata
to
their
ultimate
ultimate
location,
the
only
ones
that
one
step
is
added.
So
this
enjoys
the
simplicity
of
food
implementation.
The
way
sinking
in
most
cases,
this
will
not
introduce
the
problem.
This
we
have
enforce
it.
We
have
the
powerful
peering
and
the
client
retransmitted
that
they
can
so
for
this
implementation.
B
The
only
problematic
situation
is,
if
you
preach
it
up,
the
poop
gigi
is
done
and
the
client
was
of
them.
This
is
evil.
It's
not.
As
that
case,
if
you
jostle
one
who
is
the
in
the
PG
survived
it
can,
it
can
be,
and
this
construct
RPGs
are
advantages.
Other
analysis
in
this
PG
to
recover
toward
harvested
states
and
a
correct
stick.
So
the
only
situation
is
at
the
univ
opg
in
spell,
and
the
triangle
also
done
in
that
case,
that
we
can
you
expect
to
the
gifts
FS.
B
The
case
of
our
system
is
a
virtual
machine
and
we
may
do
a
guess
FS
three
month
it
will
possibly
possibly
be
coming
to
town
distance
by
F,
SDK
and
the
journal
will
be
playing
like
a
winner.
Water
machine
is
down
when
we
respectable
machine
we've
normally
to
fsck
and
deposited
the
SMS,
we're
able
to
generate
the
plane.
It's
hopefully
also
can
become
as
recover.
B
A
B
Ok,
so
for
for
for
a
second
algorithm
the
week
we
can,
we
can
do
it's
a
more
elegant
and
the
weekend
like
exactly
and
resembles
is
a
somatic
slow-motion
plot
device.
That
is
the
forest
for
a
second
agreement.
We
do
it
in
four
steps,
the
first
step
for
we
commit
to
try
section
eight
into
a
journal
into
the
journal
for
this
transaction.
We
add
an
unstable
flag
in
optical
metadata,
as
well
as
a
Pidgey
local
record.
B
So
when
this,
through
this
record,
will
update
the
kitchen
local
pitch
low,
the
worship,
I,
wife
and
then
for
the
second
stable
will
resonate
at
rotate.
So
for
a
third
step
we
commit
to
the
transaction
be
into
the
journal
and
to
do
the
metadata
have
updates,
as
you
ER,
and
they
also
invested.
We
will
revert
to
the
operation
of
the
transaction,
a
that
is.
B
We
will
delete
the
blackroll
object,
metadata
and
the
ins
will
add
another
Pidgey,
Pidgey
local
record
and
updates
the
PG
local
version
by
one
that
is
the
full
photo
24
a
traditional
cases.
A
transaction
will
only
updates
the
pigeonhole
wersching
by
one
right.
For
now
we
will
update
the
price
and
for
the
last
day
we
just
apply
the
metadata
so
for
for
this,
as
a
reason,
as
long
as
well
versed
in
the
PG
has
subsided,
the
PG
will
be
recovered
to
a
consistent
and
the
Crypt
state
final
issue,
powerful
ship
period.
B
So,
if
repeated
a
logical,
there
are
the
foreign
situations,
so
there
are
basically
three
situations:
the
first
first
situation,
none
of
the
OS,
this
finished
step,
one
and
that
is
to
say
low
as
low
as
the
in
the
PG
has
perceived
pearl,
is
peter
anything.
So
in
that
case,
nothing
will
happen.
So
for
a
second,
a
situation
at
least
one
of
the
OS
be
finished
sri.
In
that
case
the
local
generally
play
an
envato
SP
and
the
period
will
recover
repeat.
It
was
harvested
and
correct
estate
to
finalize
the
situation.
B
B
This
is
at
least
the
one
hablo
SP
has
finished
to
the
step
one,
so
it
has
just
updated
the
digital
version,
so
the
purim
will
bring
the
unstable
flag
to
other
OS
piece
in
the
PG
that
is
LSD
in
the
PG
will
have
the
unstable
flag.
Another
right
hand
object
so
for
normal
optical
read
and
write
if
it's
found
an
unstable
flag
in
the
object
metadata.
B
So
it
will
just
block
reply
to
requests
and
under
startled
recovery
to
randomly
choose
one
of
one
of
those
peas
to
synchronize
its
content,
no
provider
area
to
a
local
base.
So
that
is
to
say,
before
we
read
and
the
right
of
the
the
problematic
objector,
it
will
first
to
synchronize
the
content
to
be
how
distant
but
a
lotta.
Lessons
are
really
correct.
B
That
is
maybe
some
other
data
fixed
fixed
with
some
new
data,
but
this
is
just
the
block
device
into
each
cymatics
and
when,
when
I
interrupted,
ratito
right
happens
the
order
for
the
of
food
or
in
scrap.
We
have
also
make
a
minimal
reservation
to
scrub
those
your
real
scrapper.
It
will
also
check
the
flag
and
in
order
to
gather
you
found
our
table
plan,
it's
a
real
coolest
and
similar
process
and
to
get
to
synchronize
under
the
contents
within
the
content
of
the
object,
the
win
in
the
PG
and
adoro
recovery.
B
So
this
is
the
second
algorithm
for
this
algorithm
needs
to
lead
to
some
extent.
The
big
relations
to
the
current
is
that
rejection
notice
at
all
framework,
so
so
the
algorithm
itself
lies
exposed
and
elegant,
but
in
terms
of
the
implementation,
and
yet
it's
in
some
kind
of
harder,
so
so
so
yeah,
so
that
makes
it
is
a
different
description
of
them
are
blueprints
also
what
the
option-
oh
you're,
forgetting
so.
C
I
would
like
to
point
out
that
the
bad
case
is
the
data
center
failure
case,
and
it
does
happen.
Yeah.
B
B
C
C
D
B
Question
but
the
only
matter
for
a
Happy
New
Year
situation,
so
it
may
happen
that
and
for
Tory
push
coming
secretary
will
read
its
main
read
out
people
at
the
content,
but
but
it's
still
like
the
older
data
weeks
with
new
teeth,
but
it's
a
different.
So
this
is
area
this
is
behavior.
Is
the
client
is
acceptable
or
not
just
my
type,
a
question?
Yes,
if
we
treat
male
may
go
into
the
sleeve
right?
B
C
B
B
Yeah
I
think
yes,
yes,
you
an
X
people
on
top
of
us
who
the
yellow
the
situation
to
happen,
so
how
about
yeah?
Okay,
other!
Yes,
the
thing
is
some
kind
of
people
in
the
desert
relieve
some
of
the
the
comp
enter.
The
code
in
the
copies
are
different.
That
may
need
to
to
read
to
return
different
campaign
that
some
kind
of
a
we
are
default
for
the
class
or
not
I'm.
C
B
C
B
C
It's
not
that
the
OS
teaser
inconsistent,
although
that
can
also
happen
but
you're
correct
you.
The
procedure
you've
outlined
here
means
that
they
won't
be
well
know
that
there
possibly
inconsistent
and
will
correct
them
on
OST
restart,
that's
not
a
big
deal.
The
concern
is
that
without
journaling
we
have
no
way
of
knowing
that
we
come
that
either
we
wrote
the
whole
data
or
none
of
it,
because
we
don't
have
the
old
copy
any
many,
many
more.
C
C
D
Also,
a
bit
of
a
different
layering
issue
and
like
if,
if
x,
4,
x,
4
is
usefully
used
to
recovering
from
local
Kalia.
Very
failure
leave
a
vm
running
and
perhaps
by
yourself.
Coaster
goes
down
from
some
power
loss
on
that
side,
but
the
rich
machines
continues
truck
running,
and
so
it
has
that
the
data
approach
put
the
nuts
first
question
comes
back
up
with
his
torn
right,
and
the
past
gave.
C
D
C
E
C
Well,
it
might
be
if
the
vm,
if
we
propagate
it
as
IO
error
back
to
the
vm
and
43
the
vm
tree
good,
that's
the
problem,
because
normally
you
don't
get
a
torn
ride
without
power
failure,
so
the
vm
as
josh
was
pointing
out.
Wouldn't
you
wouldn't
just
continue
on
running
with
a
torn
right.
That
would
be
a
faulty
disk,
no
it'd
be
a
disk
that
was
not
performing
correctly.
B
D
It's
possible
that
we
could
like
if
the
client
is
still
running,
then
a
is
its
acting
like
ends
an
RPG
clan
in
running
into
vm,
and
it
could
be
reading.
We
could
be
assuming
that
it
either
guy
didn't
get
a
response
back
until
the
I'm
great
was
totally
committed.
A
client,
so
I
would
still
be
resounding
that
operation
and
normally
the
ocg
would
be
rejecting
it
because
it
was
a
duplicate,
but
we
could
actually
make
it
and
record
the
last
like
unstable
transaction
and
which
transaction
audio.
D
C
From
my
point
of
view,
there's
there
are
other
semantic
problems
with
ratos
that
only
really
works
for
item
potent
operations
which
not
all
rights
are
our
BD
rights,
usually
are
but
many,
but
you
can
build
labret
those
transactions
that
aren't,
and
this
would
make
that
problem
much
worse
in
the.
In
other
words,
it's
not
general
purpose,
so
you're
saying.
D
C
Make
an
argument-
that's
kind
of
it-
would
be
very
specific
to
the
rbd
use
case,
because
our
BD,
your
right,
is
sort
of
in
a
weird
position
where
the
clients
actually
don't
really
expect
unturned
rights.
They
just
attack
that
writes
that
succeed
aren't
torn,
but
that's
really
really
unique
to
our
BD.
No
one
else
uses
ratos
that
way,
and
this
would
be
a
great
deal
of
code.
This
is
actually
quite
complicated
for
one
thing
it's
positive
rbd
relies
on
this
too.
C
Two
objects
in
the
file
system
won't
necessarily
commit
in
the
order
that
you
submitted
it
in
which
is
fine,
but
it
means
that
if
you
have
ten
journal
entries
or
10
log
entries,
I'm,
sorry
in
the
PG
log,
you
may
have
12
and
five
commit,
but
not
the
other
ones.
So
the
lot,
the
peering
logic
will
need
to
be
very
careful
on
the
plus
side.
It
is
possible
to
avoid
some
of
the
problems
of
case
3,
because
you
we
may
be
able
to
roll
back
that
unstable
sis.
C
If
one
peer
has
the
unstable
flag
and
the
others
don't
we
know
that
that's
a
roll
back
up
will
trend
transaction
and
there
is
machinery
for
for
that.
So
that
might
be
interesting.
Also,
I.
Don't
think
it's
possible
for
us
to
see
that
flag
during
scrub
I
think
that
you're
correct
that
the
second
option
algorithm
makes
that
not
possible.
C
C
You
all
you
have
to
do
is
read
the
end
of
the
log
as
long
as
you're,
careful
about
maintaining
metadata
/
persistently
on
each
replica
about
which
inconsistent
objects
they
have
so
the
primary
nose
after
the
next
peering
interval
that
they
need
to
continue
recovering
those
objects.
Even
if
the
log
entries
have
been
trimmed
but
that's
doable.
B
B
C
A
C
C
B
B
C
While
the
second
option
adds
another
well
okay,
the
second
option
adds
another
commits
latency.
Is
that,
okay,
what
do
we
get
for
it?
Ham.
C
I
think
the
only
thing
we
get
for
it
is
that
Oh
actually
tell
him
you're
right
case
with
case
one.
You
actually
would
find
inconsistent
objects
and
in
scrub,
possibly
you'd
actually
have
to
after
you
completed
peering.
In
order
to
make
this
work,
you'd
have
to
scrub
backwards.
The
current
PG
log
all
the
way
to
the
end,
or
at
least
all
the
way
back
to
last,
but
made
a
piece
of
that
lasted
back
to
last
update
or
last
completed
on
disk
else.
C
B
C
So
we
do
you'd
have
to
do
that
and
you'd
have
to
remember.
You'd
actually
have
to
do
that
before
accepting
or
rejecting
any
client
requests,
because
if
you
get
a
client
request
for
a
journal
entry
that
has
already
happened,
you
can't
reject
it
until
you're
sure
that
the
object
is
consistent,
because
if
it's
or
not
reject-
but
you
know
early
return
with
success
because
you
may
need
it.
If
you
find
out
that
the
object
is
inconsistent,
so
it
may
introduce
a
bunch
of
additional
latency
to
hearing
which
isn't
the
best
thing.
C
C
C
B
Those
have
to
be
done.
Yes,
that's
how
to
be
now
and
then
will
it
also
extract
some
special
operations
like
Chrome
yeah
we
made
with.
We
need
to
make
it
to
the
traditional
way
super
traditional
Rangers
importance
of
genes
that
are
occurring
put
the
journal
yeah
like
a
new
Cologne
operations.
Yeah.
We
need
to
classify
these
of
those
operations
and
we
may
add,
on
a
flag
among
flag
on
map
inclined
to
a
BD
yeah.
We
have
a
lot
of
you
know
yet.
Is
it
wait.
C
C
A
E
D
D
C
B
C
Because
the
cost
is
that
you
have
inconsistent
rights,
so
in
other
words,
if
it
may
well
be
the
case
that
your
bottle
neck
isn't
the
journal
but
you're
backing
disk,
in
which
case
this
won't
help,
but
this
is
fairly
easy
to
benchmark
against.
Incidentally,
this
is
very
hard
to
do
in
like
for
real
life.
If
we
wanted
to
merge
it,
but
if
you
want
to
find
out
what
the
performance
impact
is,
it
will
be
pretty
simple.
C
B
A
B
C
That's
all
true,
but
I
mean
that's
when
we
look
at
it,
but
another
way
to
look
at
it
is
all
you
have
to
do.
Lose
power
to
your
data
center
is
lose
power
to
your
data
center.
It
actually
does
happen,
however,
again
I
this.
It
may
turn
out
not
to
be
all
that
big
of
performance
difference.
You
can
simulate
it
by
just
not
writing
the
journal
transactions
when
it
asks
to
Alton.
A
B
We
win
an
assimilation
first
and
I'm
the
to
say
how
much
we
can
get
much
benefit.
Yes,
we
can
get
so.
B
B
C
C
Oh
yeah
yeah,
so
I'm
going
to
point
out
that
it's
possible
that
the
problem
isn't
the
throughput,
but
that
you
are
that
the
disk
right
head
is
having
to
jump
back
and
forth
between
the
file
system
area
and
whatever
was
allocated
for
the
journal.
I'm
in
that
case.
This
won't
help
because
he's
still
to
journal
something
so
you're,
not
getting
sequential,
writes,
you're,
getting
two
random
writes
and
the
size
of
the
second
random
right
doesn't
matter
so
much.
It's
that
you're
having
to
jump
to
the
journal
at
all,
so
that
may.
A
B
B
C
E
B
B
C
It's
that
it's
that
the
file
system
scheduler,
is
constantly
jumping
the
disk
between
performing
rights
on
on
files
that
you're
writing
at
the
same
time
and
the
journal.
It's
not
that
that's
not
big
enough!
It's
that
the
disk
can
only
has
a
limited
number
of
places
that
can
write
at
once.
C
B
E
E
C
B
B
B
E
B
C
B
A
C
C
Cases
where
you're
writing
large
objects
or
large
extensive
objects,
there
are
strategies
we
can
employ.
That
avoid.
All
of
us
that
that
allow
us
to
tap
the
same
semantics
we've
always
had,
but
not
do
a
double
right.
The
case
that
matters
is
really
small
overwrites
and
it
seems
to
me
that
it's
possible,
then
that
case
the
journaling
simply
doesn't
matter
that
the
metadata
you
have
to
journal
is
already
on
a
similar
order
of
size
and
that
buffering
the
data
as
well
simply
doesn't
make
that
much
of
a
difference.
C
E
Actually,
our
data
rbd
performance
is
really
showing
that
it's
more
budget,
small
/
right.
It's
not
another
problem.
We
are
because
it's
consistently
can
see
the
HDD
can
run
to
200
hours,
that
is
the
gte
put
a
neck
and
the
journal
things
we
use
a
SSD.
The
journal,
so
journal
is
really
not
the
bottleneck,
so
the
problem
turns
out
it
would
be,
and
if
the
optimization
only
work
for
certain
kind
of
deployment
should
we
should
we
introduce
the
kind
of
complexity
into
the
code.
That's.