-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On File Systems
,----[ Quote ]
| With ext4 coming out in kernel 2.6.28, we should have a nice holdover until
| Btrfs or Tux3 begin to stabilize.
`----
http://www.kev009.com/wp/2008/11/on-file-systems/
Recent:
The State Of The Tux3 File-System
,----[ Quote ]
| Btrfs has received much of the limelight on Linux when talking about
| file-systems since it promises to compete with Sun's ZFS file-system and
| introduce several features not found in the commonly-used EXT3 and EXT4
| file-systems. However, work on other Linux file-systems hasn't halted. EXT4
| should be stable with the Linux 2.6.28 kernel and work on the Tux3
| file-system continues.
`----
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Njg4NQ
Kernel: Ext 4 Filesystem Moves Beyond Developer Status
,----[ Quote ]
| Theodore Ts'o has renamed the Ext4 filesystem, for which he has been
| responsible for source and documentation, from extdev to ext4. Linus Torvalds
| has also incorporated the change into his personal source tree for the
| upcoming Kernel 2.6.28.
|
| After the release of Kernel 2.6.27, a usual two-week merge window occurs when
| Torvalds merges the code for the next version into his personal kernel
| archive.
`----
http://www.linuxpromagazine.com/online/news/kernel_ext_4_filesystem_moves_beyond_developer_status
Ext4 is now the primary filesystem on my laptop
,----[ Quote ]
| Over the weekend, I converted my laptop to use the ext4 filesystem. So far
| so good! So far I’ve found one bug as a result of my using ext4 in
| production (if delayed allocation is enabled, i_blocks doesn’t get updated
| until the block allocation takes place, so files can appear to have 0k
| blocksize right after they are created, which is confusing/unfortunate), but
| nothing super serious yet. I will be doing backups a bit more frequently
| until I’m absolutely sure things are rock solid, though!
`----
http://tytso.livejournal.com/57492.html
ext4 Implementation
,----[ Quote ]
| One major feature present in Fedora 9 will be the ext4 implementation. The
| new filesystem will not be the default for the distro, but will be available
| for users and systems administrators to enable. New functionality includes
| larger capacities and online defragmentation, for better performance and more
| reliability. To find out more, we talked with Eric Sandeen, Fedora project
| member and filesystem developer at Red Hat.
`----
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Interviews/EricSandeen
Btrfs 0.16, Improved Scalability And Performance
,----[ Quote ]
| "Btrfs v0.16 is available for download," began Chris Mason, announcing the
| latest release of his new Btrfs filesystem. He noted, "v0.16 has a shiny new
| disk format, and is not compatible with filesystems created by older Btrfs
| releases. But, it should be the fastest Btrfs yet, with a wide variety of
| scalability fixes and new features." Improved scalability and performance
| improvements include fine grained btree locking, pushing CPU intensive
| operations such as checksumming into their own background threads, improved
| data=ordered mode, and a new cache to reduce IO requirements when cleaning up
| old transactions.
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Btrfs_0.16_Improved_Scalability_And_Performance
Related:
Btrfs 0.12, Performance Improvements
,----[ Quote ]
| Btrfs was first announced in June of 2007, as an alpha-quality filesystem
| offering checksumming of all files and metadata, extent based file storage,
| efficient packing of small files, dynamic inode allocation, writable
| snapshots, object level mirroring and striping, and fast offline filesystem
| checks, among other features. The project's website explains, "Linux has a
| wealth of filesystems to choose from, but we are facing a number of
| challenges with scaling to the large storage subsystems that are becoming
| common in today's data centers. Filesystems need to scale in their ability to
| address and manage large storage, and also in their ability to detect, repair
| and tolerate errors in the data stored on disk."
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Btrfs_0.12_Performance_Improvements
Kernel space: a better btrfs
,----[ Quote ]
| A powerful new filesystem for Linux already supports fast snapshots,
| checksums for all data, and online resizing--and plans to add ZFS-style
| built-in striping and mirroring.
`----
http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2008/012208-kernel.html?fsrc=rss-linux-news
Btrfs Online Resizing, Ext3 Conversion, and More
,----[ Quote ]
| Chris Mason announced version 0.10 of his new Btrfs filesystem, listing the
| following new features, "explicit back references, online resizing (including
| shrinking), in place conversion from Ext3 to Btrfs, data=ordered support,
| mount options to disable data COW and checksumming, and barrier support for
| sata and IDE drives".
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Btrfs_Online_Resizing_Ext3_Conversion_and_More
Linux: Btrfs, File Data and Metadata Checksums
,----[ Quote ]
| Chris Mason announced an early alpha release of his new Btrfs
| filesystem, "after the last FS summit, I started working on a new
| filesystem that maintains checksums of all file data and metadata." He
| listed the following features as "mostly implemented": "extent based file
| storage (2^64 max file size), space efficient packing of small files,
| space efficient indexed directories, dynamic inode allocation, writable
| snapshots, subvolumes (separate internal filesystem roots), checksums on
| data and metadata (multiple algorithms available), very fast offline
| filesystem check".
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/node/8376
Interview: Chris Mason about Btrfs
,----[ Quote ]
| Q: Several people might be interested what you think about ZFS, why you see a
| need for Btrfs “despite of ZFS” (some people think ZFS is the solution for
| everything for them).
|
| Well, the short answer is that for Linux, there is no ZFS. I know about
| the FUSE port, but that isn’t a long term solution in terms of
| performance or enterprise workloads. ZFS has an impressive list of
| features (and clearly many happy users), but the real competition for
| Btrfs is other Linux filesystems.
`----
http://liquidat.wordpress.com/2007/08/07/interview-chris-mason-about-btrfs/
A better ext4 filesystem for Linux
,----[ Quote
| A new Linux filesystem gets rid of the 256-petabyte limit, and adds a
| checksum feature for the journal. But developers want you to know that it's
| not yet ready for production sytems.
`----
http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2008/012908-kernel.html
ext4 2.6.25 Merge Plans
,----[ Quote ]
| "The following patches have been in the -mm tree for a while, and I plan to
| push them to Linus when the 2.6.25 merge window opens," began Theodore Ts'o,
| offering the patches for review before they are merged.
`----
http://kerneltrap.org/Linux/Ext4_2.6.25_Merge_Plans
ZFS, XFS, EXT4 Filesystems Compared
,----[ Quote ]
| EXT4 is fast for metadata operations, tar, untar, cpio, and postmark. EXT4 is
| much faster than the others under FFSB. EXT4 with hardware RAID and external
| journal device is ludicrously fast. EXT4 seems to have a bad interaction with
| software RAID, probably because mkfs fails to query the RAID layout when
| setting the filesystem parameters.
|
| ZFS has excellent performance on metadata tests. ZFS has very bad sequential
| transfer with hardware RAID and appalling sequential transfer with software
| RAID. ZFS can copy the linux kernel source code in only 3 seconds! ZFS has
| equal latency for read and write requests under mixed loads, which is good.
|
| XFS has good sequential transfer under Bonnie++. Oddly XFS has better
| sequential reads when using an external journal, which makes little sense. Is
| noatime broken on XFS? XFS is very slow on all the metadata tests. XFS takes
| the RAID layout into consideration and it performs well on randomio with
| hardware or software RAID.
`----
http://tastic.brillig.org/%7Ejwb/zfs-xfs-ext4.html
First benchmarks of the ext4 file system
,----[ Quote ]
| The ext4 file system promises improved data integrity
| and performance, together with less limitations, and is
| definitely the step in the right way. Even if there are
| some regressions in our measurements, when compared to
| ext3, they're quite small and no doubt will be fixed
| before the development is finished. On the other hand,
| under some workloads ext4 is already showing much better
| results.
`----
http://linux.inet.hr/first_benchmarks_of_the_ext4_file_system.html
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkkzzdAACgkQU4xAY3RXLo6exACfUSLNyvi1ONSK9s1tXF+qsK7O
fI8AnjZrsXiJj1hoUkV7m6Jt9dRPGx8Q
=yVOh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
