Re: Solaris ZFS on Linux [Was: Re: the " 'official' point of view"expressedby regarding reiser4 inclusion]

From: David Masover
Date: Tue Aug 01 2006 - 13:00:57 EST

Theodore Tso wrote:

Ah, but as soon as the repacker thread runs continuously, then you
lose all or most of the claimed advantage of "wandering logs".
So instead of a write-write overhead, you end up with a
write-read-write overhead.

This would tend to suggest that the repacker should not run constantly, but also that while it's running, performance could be almost as good as ext3.

But of course, people tend to disable the repacker when doing
benchmarks because they're trying to play the "my filesystem/database
has bigger performance numbers than yours" game....

So you run your own benchmarks, I'll run mine... Benchmarks for everyone! I'd especially like to see what performance is like with the repacker not running, and during the repack. If performance during a repack is comparable to ext3, I think we win, although we have to amend that statement to "My filesystem/database has the same or bigger perfomance numbers than yours."
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at