From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ww0-f49.google.com ([74.125.82.49]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1REf22-0002hF-FE for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:30:27 +0000 Received: by wwg9 with SMTP id 9so633277wwg.18 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2011 03:30:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBIFS FAQ: document reasons for loss of space efficiency From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Daniel Drake Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 13:29:54 +0300 In-Reply-To: <20111010120701.C525F9D401E@zog.reactivated.net> References: <20111010120701.C525F9D401E@zog.reactivated.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <1318588201.12351.88.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 13:07 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: > OLPC is suffering a bit from the loss of space efficiency of UBIFS, > document reasons for this based on an IRC discussion with Artem. > > Also document the difference in default compression schemes between > JFFS2 and UBIFS which bit us at first. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Drake Changed mb and GB to MiB and GiB and pushed, thanks! -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy