linux-kernel - Re: Solaris ZFS on Linux

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 3 Aug 2006 11:32:13 +0200
From:	Helge Hafting <helgehaf@...el.hist.no>
To:	Wil Reichert <wil.reichert@...il.com>
Cc:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>,
	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>,
	Ian Stirling <ian.stirling@...ve.plus.com>,
	David Masover <ninja@...phack.com>,
	David Lang <dlang@...italinsight.com>,
	Nate Diller <nate.diller@...il.com>,
	Adrian Ulrich <reiser4@...nkenlights.ch>,
	"Horst H. von Brand" <vonbrand@....utfsm.cl>, ipso@...ppymail.ca,
	lkml@...productions.com, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	LKML Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	reiserfs-list@...esys.com
Subject: Re: Solaris ZFS on Linux

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 07:20:25PM -0700, Wil Reichert wrote:
> On 8/2/06, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl> wrote:
> >Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com> writes:
> >
> >> IMHO the best alternative for a situation like that is a storage
> >> controller with a battery-backed cache and a hunk of flash NVRAM for
> >> when the power shuts off (just in case you run out of battery), as
> >> well as a separate 1GB battery-backed PCI ramdisk for an external
> >> journal device (likewise equipped with flash NVRAM).  It doesn't take
> >> much power at all to write a gig of stuff to a small flash chip
> >> (Think about your digital camera which runs off a couple AA's), so
> >> with a fair-sized on-board battery pack you could easily transfer its
> >> data to NVRAM and still have power left to back up data in RAM for 12
> >> hours or so.  That way bootup is fast (no reading 1GB of data from
> >> NVRAM) but there's no risk of data loss.
> >
> >Not sure - reading flash is fast, but writing is quite slow.
> >A digital camera can consume a set of 2 or 4 2500 mAh AA cells
> >for a fraction of 1 GB (of course, only a part of power goes
> >to flash).
> 
> Seeks are fast, throughput is terrible, power is minimal:
> 
> http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/supertalent-flashide/index.x?pg=1
> 
That particular flash drive had terrible througput.

But there are other alternatives.  I use a kingston 4GB 
compactflash card as a disk, and it reads 22MB/s, according to
specs and tests with hdparm.  And it writes 16MB/s.  

Much better than the sorry thing in that test, about the same
read speed as their worst platter-based harddisk.  And of course it still have
the nice seek times of non-rotating media. :-)

Helge Hafting

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/