linux-kernel - Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

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, 12 Mar 2008 23:32:52 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...nq.net>
cc:	David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
	Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Ramback: faster than a speeding bullet

On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Daniel Phillips wrote:

> On Wednesday 12 March 2008 22:45, David Newall wrote:
>
>> Your idea seems predicated on throwing large amounts of RAM at the
>> problem.  What I want to know is this: Is it really 25 times faster than
>> ext3 with an equally huge buffer cache?
>
> Yes.

this I don't understand. what makes your approach 25x faster?

looking at the comparison of a 500G filesystem with 500G of ram allocated 
for a buffer cache.

yes, initially it will be a bit slower (until the files get into the 
buffer cache), and if fsync is disabled all writes will go to the buffer 
cache (until writeout hits)

I may be able to see room for a few percent difference, but not 2x, let 
alone 25x.

David Lang
--
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/