Re: [PATCH] LogFS take three

Artem Bityutskiy
2007-05-16T11:39:15Z

On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 12:34 +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Jörn Engel wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 May 2007 12:54:14 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > Personally I'd just go for 'JFFS3'. After all, it has a better claim to
> > > the name than either of its predecessors :)
> >
> > Did you ever see akpm's facial expression when he tried to pronounce
> > "JFFS2"? ;)
>
> JFFS3 is a good, meaningful name to anyone familiar with JFFS2.
>
> But if akpm can't pronounce it, how about FFFS for faster flash
> filesystem.... ;-)

The problem is that JFFS2 will always be faster in terms of I/O speed
anyway, just because it does not have to maintain on-flash indexing
data structures. But yes, it is slow in mount and in building big
inodes, so the "faster" is confusing.

--
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)