From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 13:56:01 -0700
Subject: [Ocfs2-devel] OCFS2 features RFC - separate journal?
In-Reply-To: <44594EC9.3040407@google.com>
References: <20060425183553.GB10524@ca-server1.us.oracle.com>
	<445936FE.90401@google.com> <44594AE2.9080802@oracle.com>
	<44594EC9.3040407@google.com>
Message-ID: <445A6A61.2090009@oracle.com>
List-Id: <ocfs2-devel.oss.oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com


> journal.  These two things add up to a _huge_ performance boost for the
> journal, if it can be separated.

Sure, I don't doubt the high level theory.  Does anyone have numbers to
show it's relative effect in practice?  That'd be interesting.

> It is worth remembering that not every OCFS2 user will be running it on a
> big expensive SAN.  Probably not even the majority.

Well, that's debatable.  My only point, though, is that there are higher
priority things that we should get to first because they affect *everyone*.

If the lack of external journals makes you sad, well, I'm sorry to hear
that.  We certainly wouldn't turn away patches if someone got to it
before us.

> IMHO, the separate journal on NVRAM will yield a much bigger gain and be
> much less work besides.

So noted.  I'm curious, though.  What sort of NVRAM hardware do you have
in mind?

- z