From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34536 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753856AbaAVMMV (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jan 2014 07:12:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 13:12:20 +0100 From: David Sterba To: Roger Binns Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Working on Btrfs as topic for master thesis Message-ID: <20140122121220.GF6498@twin.jikos.cz> Reply-To: dsterba@suse.cz References: <8E968DF3B7EC0D40B67B5A9D25675A6A03FC70@MBXSRV03EDU.edu.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 09:44:39PM -0800, Roger Binns wrote: > If you are more interested in the theoretical side then looking into > compression would be interesting. ie how close to the theoretical best > compression are we. Various filesystems like btrfs and NTFS make all > sorts of compromises in algorithm choices but also especially in the size > of blocks they compress. How much better could be done? I have done some work here, so far it's stalled due to more important work. https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Compression_enhancements Do you have other suggestions beyond what's proposed there?