Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVMe ZNS Support Coming To Linux 5.9

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

  • oiaohm
    replied
    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    I'm curious to know if this would be beneficial for desktop usage purposes.
    I did just watched a video about zoned namespaces, but from what i get the target audience isn't desktop users.

    I'm guessing zoned namespaces is beneficial for situations where the services are virtualized but the storage for those services is still written to one NVMe/SSD. With this zoning stuff those services could be dedicated to their own zone on a NVMe/SSD. Still, i'd like some more confirmation as i'm all but sure about this.
    Really that video is targeted at the server market. But the largest users of SSD without DDRAM are desktop users. Yes removing the DDRAM from the SSD could be like a 10 USD saving off the built cost of the machines over a million units of something that really adds up and if it not giving a performance advantage any more its a direct saving makers of devices will be able todo. Currently removing DDRAM off SSD without ZNS can result in short SSD life span and unpredictable performance by attempting to make up for the missing DDRAM this is not great for consumer complaints and warranty claims..

    Big thing about ZNS is reduce dram requirement on SSD to perform well. This means a ZNS version of a DDRAM less SSD will have less issues and be a lot closer to the versions ZNS drives with DDRAM we will not know how close until we see ZNS dram-less drives in production(yes it possible that they will be that close that there will be no functional difference in lifespan). Problem here is operating systems have to catch up and I don't see Microsoft being that quick. Android, Chromebooks and Linux workstations could be taking advantage of ZNS drives fairly quickly.

    Do note that video listed working on support for f2fs, ext4 and Btrfs with Xfs down the track. This is another case of ZFS left out in the cold like they were with SMR.

    Zone based storage devices be it SSD or harddrives is the future tech be it SMR or ZNS it will come to the desktop at some point in volume.

    Leave a comment:


  • KesZerda
    replied
    Originally posted by markg85 View Post
    I'm curious to know if this would be beneficial for desktop usage purposes.
    I did just watched a video about zoned namespaces, but from what i get the target audience isn't desktop users.

    I'm guessing zoned namespaces is beneficial for situations where the services are virtualized but the storage for those services is still written to one NVMe/SSD. With this zoning stuff those services could be dedicated to their own zone on a NVMe/SSD. Still, i'd like some more confirmation as i'm all but sure about this.
    Zoned namespaces are more about giving more information about how the disk itself behaves. While an nvme device may expose itself as a collection of 4k sectors, the underlying media may be able to write 4k blocks, but may only be able to erase/rewrite blocks that are 64k, 128k, or even bigger in size. Thus, if you're doing a lot of updates to a lot of small files, you might run into a write amplification issue, where just a few writes on the OS side could involve writing and rewriting the underlying data multiple times as it deletes and overwrites the blocks containing that data.

    For the desktop side, the big ones I can see offhand are more predictable drive performance, and longer life, because the OS doesn't have to make assumptions regarding how the underlying storage medium behaves. Bringing all that information to the OS level can mean filesystem developers, app developers, etc, could work those assumptions into the decisions of how and when to write data -- it might be more worth it, for example, to accept a bit higher risk of data loss to batch writes together to ensure consistent performance. It can also mean potentially less expensive drives, because pulling that data to the OS level means that the drive can just worry about writing blocks to disk, and not concern itself with writing/overwriting data to make it look like a disk with 4k sectors, and the amounts of on-drive RAM/CPU/etc needed to make that happen.

    Leave a comment:


  • cjcox
    replied
    Short answer, yes. Even if mainly for reduced costs with some performance gains (less complexity of GC and DRAM requirements for mapping).

    Leave a comment:


  • ix900
    replied
    Suppose benchmarks would be needed. Anything else is speculation and unimportant.

    Leave a comment:


  • markg85
    replied
    I'm curious to know if this would be beneficial for desktop usage purposes.
    I did just watched a video about zoned namespaces, but from what i get the target audience isn't desktop users.

    I'm guessing zoned namespaces is beneficial for situations where the services are virtualized but the storage for those services is still written to one NVMe/SSD. With this zoning stuff those services could be dedicated to their own zone on a NVMe/SSD. Still, i'd like some more confirmation as i'm all but sure about this.

    Leave a comment:


  • phoronix
    started a topic NVMe ZNS Support Coming To Linux 5.9

    NVMe ZNS Support Coming To Linux 5.9

    Phoronix: NVMe ZNS Support Coming To Linux 5.9

    Landing in the block subsystem's "-next" tree today is ZNS support for NVMe drives...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-ZNS-Linux-5.9
Working...
X