linux-kernel - Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS

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

Date:	Wed, 9 Apr 2008 23:09:07 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...g.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
	Jörn Engel <joern@...fs.org>,
	ext-adrian.hunter@...ia.com, jwboyer@...il.com,
	"Artem B. Bityutskiy" <dedekind@...dex.ru>
Subject: Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)

Hi!

> For me, the motivators to wait for LogFS are mainly the 
> facts that it
> can work on traditional block devices, and not only on 
> pure flash:
> 
> 1. It works on normal block devices and it supports 
> transparent compression
> 
> Today, a 64 GB SSD/flash-based media costs ~about the 
> same as a 1 TB
> hard disk. This makes flash very expensive to use; 
> compression can
> compensate that cost a bit (will depend on the usage, of 
> course).
> 
> I believe there is no other Linux filesystem which can 
> do transparent
> compression on block devices.

I'd like compressed filesystem for maps and lingvistic data... but
will the flash flesystems have 'reasonable' performance when used on
harddrive?
							Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/