From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@yandex.ru>
To: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@wpkg.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, "Jörn Engel" <joern@logfs.org>,
ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com, jwboyer@gmail.com
Subject: Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 12:57:46 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47F2071A.6010406@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47F202D9.20405@wpkg.org>
Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> Such as?
ext3 for example.
> Flash (also on block devices) is slow and expensive (when compared to
> modern hard disks) and therefore compression is *very* useful here.
Well, if you are ready to trade performance to compression, then well,
go ahead :-) May be I used too strong wording, but I wanted to say then
use raw flash then. But I'd also consider implementing compression support
for a block based FS. Reiser4 claimed to have it for example.
> Do you mean using hacks like block2mtd? It's hacky, and pretty hard to
> boot a system this way (need to build own initramfs, with a static
> block2mtd or loads of libraries - not something an average user would
> like to do; no distro supports it; updating a kernel would be a pain etc.).
Well, ok, it still sounds strange for me, but you may use JFFS2 and UBIFS
with block2mtd as well if you really want to.
> True.
> Unfortunately, there is no way to access flash directly on flash-based
> block devices (USB-sticks, IDE-flash disks, SSD disks etc.).
Yeah, that's a pity :-(
> Unfortunately, traditional filesystems were rather designed for rotating
> media / cheap disks (no transparent compression; tend to accumulate
> writes in one area of the disk - more on that - below).
Sure.
> Performance is only one factor in the equation. Other factors are: cost
> and reliability.
>
> I speak from experience: flash-based block devices tend to have poor
> wear-levelling (at least Transcend IDE-flash disks).
> To reproduce:
> - format a 2 GB Transcend IDE-flash disk with ext3
> - write a small file (50-100 kB)
> - update that file ~several hundred thousand times - as you finish,
> IDE-flash disk will have 200-300 badblocks
Yeah, that's bad. But if you have a bad FTL, surely there is not guarantee
a flash FS will help? Isn't it better to use better hardware?
We did some experiments with MMC cards and we were unable to wear them
out with re-writing the same sectors again and again. This suggests there
_is_ better FTL hardware then that USB stick you was using.
Anyway, your original mail said Logfs can work with block devices. My answer -
UBIFS too, but this is very strange to do this IMO. But OK, it might is not
senseless, sorry for the wording. :-)
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-04-01 10:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-04-01 8:02 UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system) Tomasz Chmielewski
2008-04-01 8:45 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 9:03 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 9:09 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 9:31 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 9:39 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2008-04-01 9:57 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2008-04-02 14:17 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2008-04-02 14:22 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 11:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-04-01 11:23 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 16:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-04-01 21:26 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-04-02 4:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-02 6:25 ` Willy Tarreau
2008-04-02 7:17 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-09 21:09 ` Pavel Machek
2008-04-09 21:32 ` Jörn Engel
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-03-27 14:55 [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system Artem Bityutskiy
2008-03-31 12:29 ` Jan Engelhardt
2008-03-31 12:47 ` Adrian Hunter
2008-03-31 13:20 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 5:26 ` UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system) Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 5:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 5:56 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 9:25 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 9:39 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 10:51 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 11:17 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 9:19 ` Jörn Engel
2008-04-01 9:46 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2008-04-01 11:16 ` Jörn Engel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47F2071A.6010406@yandex.ru \
--to=dedekind@yandex.ru \
--cc=ext-adrian.hunter@nokia.com \
--cc=joern@logfs.org \
--cc=jwboyer@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mangoo@wpkg.org \
--cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).