[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080409210907.GA9683@ucw.cz>
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists