Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: XFS Is Becoming Leaner While Btrfs & EXT4 Gain Weight

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,413

    Default XFS Is Becoming Leaner While Btrfs & EXT4 Gain Weight

    Phoronix: XFS Is Becoming Leaner While Btrfs & EXT4 Gain Weight

    Red Hat's Eric Sandeen has written an interesting blog post concerning the size of popular Linux file-systems and their kernel modules. It turns out that the XFS file-system is losing lines of code, while maintaining the same feature-set and robustness, but the EXT4 and Btrfs file-systems continue to have a net increase in lines of code...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=OTU4OA

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Dhaka,Bangladesh
    Posts
    105

    Cool A quoto

    "Measuring software productivity by lines of code is like measuring progress on an airplane by how much it weighs."- Bill Gates

    May be we can find if there is any real improvement by a phoronix benchmark

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    It's not too surprising though that the Btrfs file-system size is on the rise as it's still under active development and new features are continuing to be added.
    That's the only sentence that is needed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    It's also noteworthy that according to the graph on the original post ext4 is only approaching half of the LOCs of xfs...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    122

    Default Lol

    Quote Originally Posted by ChrisXY View Post
    It's also noteworthy that according to the graph on the original post ext4 is only approaching half of the LOCs of xfs...
    That kinda is what actually matters....

    +1

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,216

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zeealpal View Post
    That kinda is what actually matters....

    +1
    Yeah, the fact that XFS code has been decreasing kind of proves the point. That it was complicated and not extremely well integrated with Linux, otherwise it shouldn't be possible to be consistently reducing the LOCs like that over an extended period of time. But at least it's getting better.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    XFS has always served me well. During the days EXT4 was still causing data corruption, XFS did its job.
    The only problem I had, was when I broke the hard drive's partition table. It took me a while to get a utility to recover the XFS partition. It worked, eventually.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Given that XFS was originally ported directly from IRIX I wouldn't be surprised if there was a "compatability layer" in place to map any systemcalls that weren't present in Linux. Given that IRIX has been dead in water since 2006 the guys in SGI/XFS can over time reduce dependency on such a layer -- as they don't have to maintain codebase with IRIX XFS anymore.

  9. #9

    Default

    It's not the first time forum is more informative than article.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    401

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It's not the first time forum is more informative than article.
    I am not sure why you call it an article. This was submitted under "Latest Linux News".

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •