* reiser4.1
@ 2005-03-02 4:34 ` Gagan Rajpal
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Gagan Rajpal @ 2005-03-02 4:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
Are there any plans or schedule for a reiser4.1? when will it be safe
to label reiser4 as safe for using on mission critical servers?
Thanks,
Gagan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* reiser4.1
@ 2005-03-02 4:34 ` Gagan Rajpal
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Gagan Rajpal @ 2005-03-02 4:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
Are there any plans or schedule for a reiser4.1? when will it be safe
to label reiser4 as safe for using on mission critical servers?
Thanks,
Gagan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: reiser4.1
@ 2005-03-02 15:11 ` Vladimir Saveliev
2005-03-02 21:47 ` reiser4.1 Hans Reiser
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Vladimir Saveliev @ 2005-03-02 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gagan Rajpal; +Cc: reiserfs-list
Hello
On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 07:34, Gagan Rajpal wrote:
> Are there any plans or schedule for a reiser4.1?
Currently, nobody actively works on repacker (which is the main thing
which is destinated for 4.1). OTOH, some work was done earlier, so
hopefully, when 4.0 is considered stable, 4.1 will not take amount of
time comparable with amount of time 4.0 took.
> when will it be safe
> to label reiser4 as safe for using on mission critical servers?
>
After it is one year in Linus kernel.
> Thanks,
> Gagan
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: reiser4.1
2005-03-02 15:11 ` reiser4.1 Vladimir Saveliev
@ 2005-03-02 21:47 ` Hans Reiser
2005-03-03 8:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Hans Reiser @ 2005-03-02 21:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vladimir Saveliev; +Cc: Gagan Rajpal, reiserfs-list
Vladimir Saveliev wrote:
>Hello
>
>On Wed, 2005-03-02 at 07:34, Gagan Rajpal wrote:
>
>
>>Are there any plans or schedule for a reiser4.1?
>>
>>
>
>Currently, nobody actively works on repacker (which is the main thing
>which is destinated for 4.1). OTOH, some work was done earlier, so
>hopefully, when 4.0 is considered stable, 4.1 will not take amount of
>time comparable with amount of time 4.0 took.
>
>
Compression is what will be in 4.1, not the repacker. At least, I hope
edward gets it done soon.....
>
>
>>when will it be safe
>>to label reiser4 as safe for using on mission critical servers?
>>
>>
>>
>
>After it is one year in Linus kernel.
>
>
>
>>Thanks,
>>Gagan
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re[2]: reiser4.1
2005-03-02 21:47 ` reiser4.1 Hans Reiser
@ 2005-03-03 8:55 ` Pysiak Satriani
2005-03-03 11:09 ` reiser4.1 Edward Shishkin
2005-03-04 7:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Valdis.Kletnieks
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pysiak Satriani @ 2005-03-03 8:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
Hi
> Compression is what will be in 4.1, not the repacker. At least, I hope
> edward gets it done soon.....
I've read an interview with Hans in the polish edition of Chip Special some
time ago.
I remember Hans saying that nowadays CPUs are so fast, they compress
faster than HDDs move the heads around and do the writes. So compression,
if done properly, can be with no negative impact to speed.
Can you say what level of compression with which processors would handle
it without speedloss?
Regards,
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: reiser4.1
2005-03-03 8:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
@ 2005-03-03 11:09 ` Edward Shishkin
2005-03-04 7:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Valdis.Kletnieks
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Edward Shishkin @ 2005-03-03 11:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pysiak Satriani; +Cc: reiserfs-list
Pysiak Satriani wrote:
>Hi
>
>
>
>>Compression is what will be in 4.1, not the repacker. At least, I hope
>>edward gets it done soon.....
>>
>>
>I've read an interview with Hans in the polish edition of Chip Special some
>time ago.
>I remember Hans saying that nowadays CPUs are so fast, they compress
>faster than HDDs move the heads around and do the writes.
>
That is the fact. Moreover CPUs tends to develop faster then hard drives.
> So compression,
>if done properly, can be with no negative impact to speed.
>
>Can you say what level of compression with which processors would handle
>it without speedloss?
>
We don't have comprehensive benchmarks as it is not quite stable. The
following is some
results for 'cp'. Note that the cpu time doesn't include flushing and
compression:
belka workstation:
Dual Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.40GHz;
1G RAM;
36G ide partition;
SMP on;
Linux 2.6.9-rc1-mm5
reiser4 (Large keys)
Creation of 20 linux source trees
UNIX_FILES:
(policy=tails)
real 2m32.505s
sys 1m18.876s
df 3205900
(policy=smart)
real 2m22.251s
sys 1m1.100s
df 3292936
CRYPTCOMPRESS FILES
(64K compression):
NONE
real 2m27.448s
sys 0m46.702s
df 3214952
GZIP1
real 2m50.132s
sys 0m44.647s
df 1045660
LZO1
real 1m52.028s
sys 0m44.779s
df 1343188
LZRW1
real 1m50.048s
sys 0m44.644s
df 1504196
>Regards,
>Maciej
>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: Re[2]: reiser4.1
2005-03-03 8:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
2005-03-03 11:09 ` reiser4.1 Edward Shishkin
@ 2005-03-04 7:55 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2005-03-04 19:22 ` Re[4]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Valdis.Kletnieks @ 2005-03-04 7:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pysiak Satriani; +Cc: reiserfs-list
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --]
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 09:55:20 +0100, Pysiak Satriani said:
> I remember Hans saying that nowadays CPUs are so fast, they compress
> faster than HDDs move the heads around and do the writes. So compression,
> if done properly, can be with no negative impact to speed.
>
> Can you say what level of compression with which processors would handle
> it without speedloss?
IBM's AIX 4.3 and later support LZ compression on their JFS file system.
I was able to measure a 10-15% speed-up by converting /usr to compressed
even on a 133MZ Power604e chip because even back then, it was faster to
read half as many blocks off a SCSI disk and decompress.
So it's been at least a potential win for a decade or so, assuming your
filesystem is able to deal well with fragments (you can't really win unless
you take a 4K or so logical block, compress it to some number of 512-byte
chunks, and then store the resulting chunks cheaply - JFS does the
blocks-and-frags efficiently, so it's easy to win. On the other hand,
it would be dreadful for Reiser3 - imagine having to do tail packing
for *every block* (which is what you end up doing, sort of...)
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 226 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re[4]: reiser4.1
2005-03-04 7:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Valdis.Kletnieks
@ 2005-03-04 19:22 ` Pysiak Satriani
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Pysiak Satriani @ 2005-03-04 19:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: reiserfs-list
Hello Valdis,
Friday, March 4, 2005, 8:55:52 AM, you wrote:
> IBM's AIX 4.3 and later support LZ compression on their JFS file system.
> I was able to measure a 10-15% speed-up by converting /usr to compressed
> even on a 133MZ Power604e chip because even back then, it was faster to
> read half as many blocks off a SCSI disk and decompress.
Interesting.
> So it's been at least a potential win for a decade or so, assuming your
> filesystem is able to deal well with fragments (you can't really win unless
> you take a 4K or so logical block, compress it to some number of 512-byte
> chunks, and then store the resulting chunks cheaply - JFS does the
> blocks-and-frags efficiently, so it's easy to win.
I wonder if NTFS compression does it well... I was always scared of
compression on NTFS because of possible slowdowns and just the fact that
compression adds another level of complexity to all reads/write and
possible future recovery if something breaks down.
--
Best regards,
Maciej
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-03-04 19:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-03-02 4:34 reiser4.1 Gagan Rajpal
2005-03-02 4:34 ` reiser4.1 Gagan Rajpal
2005-03-02 15:11 ` reiser4.1 Vladimir Saveliev
2005-03-02 21:47 ` reiser4.1 Hans Reiser
2005-03-03 8:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
2005-03-03 11:09 ` reiser4.1 Edward Shishkin
2005-03-04 7:55 ` Re[2]: reiser4.1 Valdis.Kletnieks
2005-03-04 19:22 ` Re[4]: reiser4.1 Pysiak Satriani
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.