Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Btrfs File-System Mount Option Testing From Linux 3.14

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Btrfs File-System Mount Option Testing From Linux 3.14

    Phoronix: Btrfs File-System Mount Option Testing From Linux 3.14

    Following our recent HDD benchmarking and solid-state drive testing of the Linux 3.14 kernel with various file-systems, for this weekend article we have done more tests of Btrfs on Linux 3.14 when trying out various Btrfs mount options.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=19940

  • #2
    Off-topic, but: @Michael: why are your recent photo shots so yellow?

    Comment


    • #3
      Wrt last test, nodatacow is pretty much eat-my-data. It turns off checksumming so Btrfs won't detect if your data gets corrupted and can lead to in time catastrophic results since there's no possibility of having on-boot fsck detect corruption either.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
        Wrt last test, nodatacow is pretty much eat-my-data. It turns off checksumming so Btrfs won't detect if your data gets corrupted and can lead to in time catastrophic results since there's no possibility of having on-boot fsck detect corruption either.
        True, but nodatacow can be turned on/off per filesystem, subvolume, and even i think per file so its only REALLY an issue here where its off for the whole filesystem

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by mudig View Post
          Off-topic, but: @Michael: why are your recent photo shots so yellow?
          Generally when I am after taking a quick photo at night with lights on in my office and for just a quick photo will use iPhone 5S over pulling out a proper DSLR camera.
          Michael Larabel
          http://www.michaellarabel.com/

          Comment


          • #6
            Sooo... space_cache is one of the default mount options.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
              Wrt last test, nodatacow is pretty much eat-my-data. It turns off checksumming so Btrfs won't detect if your data gets corrupted and can lead to in time catastrophic results since there's no possibility of having on-boot fsck detect corruption either.
              On platters, yeah, but on ssds I don't think it would matter since the controller decides where to put the data. That is, I'm not sure it differentiates between cow and nodatacow.
              I'd be curious about how combinations of options benchmark. So, say, space cache, lzo, discard(this should only run during downtime so shouldn't affect benchmarks), ssd spread and noatime(although modification times should still register).

              Comment


              • #8
                In 2 years time, no one will hear anything about ZFS.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Would BTRFS be good for USB flash drives and SD cards? What kind of CPU overhead is expected with LZO and ZLIB compression especially on a Silvermont Atom based PCs or even on older Atoms like the ones in old Compulab devices?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Seconded

                    Originally posted by liam View Post
                    On platters, yeah, but on ssds I don't think it would matter since the controller decides where to put the data. That is, I'm not sure it differentiates between cow and nodatacow.
                    I'd be curious about how combinations of options benchmark. So, say, space cache, lzo, discard(this should only run during downtime so shouldn't affect benchmarks), ssd spread and noatime(although modification times should still register).
                    I also want to know the best combo. Please think like an admin when testing:
                    1. Take corruption switches out of consideration
                    2. Find the best combination.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X