[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)
    Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
    > Andi Kleen wrote:
    >> Artem Bityutskiy <> writes:
    >>> Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
    >>>> For me, the motivators to wait for LogFS are mainly the facts that it
    >>>> can work on traditional block devices, and not only on pure flash:
    >>> Sorry Thomasz, for me this makes zero sense. There are _much_ better
    >>> file
    >>> systems for block devices.
    >> I think he refers to flash disks appearing as block devices, like
    >> usb sticks or similar.
    > Right, I also meant that in my opinion it makes more sense to use
    > traditional
    > file-systems like ext3 on USB-key/MMC and the like stuff (which I
    > confusingly
    > referred as "block devices"), or may be something more "heavy-weight" like
    > XFS or JFS (never tried them, though).

    Well, even auto-levelling storage should benefit from a filesystem which
    minimizes the total number of flash sectors churned, which means doing
    as few writes as possible and to large, contiguous sections.


     \ /
      Last update: 2008-04-01 18:31    [W:0.020 / U:6.164 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site