Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:57:08 -0400 | From | Timothy Miller <> | Subject | Re: File system compression, not at the block layer |
| |
Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > >>>>Well, why not do the compression at the highest layer? >>>>[...] doing it transparently and for all files. >>> >>>http://e2compr.sourceforge.net/ >> >>It's been done (see the above URL), but given how cheap disk space has >>gotten, and how the speed of CPU has gotten faster much more quickly >>than disk access has, many/most people have not be interested in >>trading off performance for space. As a result, there are race > > > Is CPU_speed / disk_throughput increasing? If so, compression > might help once again. CPU_speed / net_throughput probably is > increasing, so compressedNFS would probably make sense.
I've always felt that way, but every time I mention it, people tell me it's not worth the CPU overhead. For many years, I have felt that there should be an IP socket type which was inherently compressed.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |