Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

LZ4 For Btrfs Arrives While Its FSCK Remains M.I.A.

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

  • phoronix
    started a topic LZ4 For Btrfs Arrives While Its FSCK Remains M.I.A.

    LZ4 For Btrfs Arrives While Its FSCK Remains M.I.A.

    Phoronix: LZ4 For Btrfs Arrives While Its FSCK Remains M.I.A.

    The proper fsck utility for the Btrfs file-system remains M.I.A. while a contribution from an independent developer introduces LZ4 compression support to this next-generation Linux file-system...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA1OTQ

  • mercutio
    replied
    Originally posted by rogerdpack View Post
    apparently they're waiting for an impending patch to the kernel to add lz4 "natively" so that they can just leverage that instead of their own version of lz4. Hopefully soon
    what'd be really cool is if lz4-hc was supported as well as lz4, so when having mostly read and not written data can use lz4-hc, and when having write data can use lz4 normal.

    although even lz4-hc as default on things like cheap ssds, usb sticks with fast reads and slow writes could be of benefit. although may need something slightly in between for slower computers. actually what could be cool is a background lz4 to lz4-hc thing that could be run to further compress files occassionally. (would probably speed up boots, and free up disk space, again more important on slow/cheap/small ssd's)
    Last edited by mercutio; 07-03-2013, 08:32 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogerdpack
    replied
    Originally posted by mercutio View Post
    yeah i'm still waiting for it. what gives?
    apparently they're waiting for an impending patch to the kernel to add lz4 "natively" so that they can just leverage that instead of their own version of lz4. Hopefully soon

    Leave a comment:


  • mercutio
    replied
    Originally posted by rogerdpack View Post
    I believe the lz4 stuff was never merged is that right?

    yeah i'm still waiting for it. what gives?

    Leave a comment:


  • rogerdpack
    replied
    not merged

    I believe the lz4 stuff was never merged is that right?

    Leave a comment:


  • evergreen
    replied
    Thanks for the link,

    though i don't understand the results to be fair

    Is that a comparison between lz4 & lzo ?
    If yes, why then is there one config called "btrfs-lzo-lz4"
    and the other one called "2012-03-04 13:47" ?

    Rgds

    Leave a comment:


  • drgr33n
    replied
    Here's my comparison between LZ4 and LZO using 7 benchmarks.

    Apache
    Compile
    postgresql (failed) will try again.
    SQLite
    Unpacking the linux kernel

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...AR-1203043AR76

    Leave a comment:


  • drgr33n
    replied
    Yes working on it. I've just patched my kernel against the new r58 lz4 code that has a small improvement in speed. I'm going to compare against that and LZO compression over the weekend skipping some of the benchmarks because some write zeros to the disk and compress too well which leads to misleading results.

    Leave a comment:


  • evergreen
    replied
    Great work drgr33n !!

    Clear and detailed results !

    Is there any way to make these "comparable", say with non-compressed & gzip-compressed settings for example ?

    Leave a comment:


  • drgr33n
    replied
    Full results here !!!

    http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...AR-BTRFSLZ4124

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X