Re: [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system

[JÃrn Engel]

On Mon, 31 March 2008 15:47:05 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >
> >And how does it compare to logfs?
> 
> We don't know a lot about logfs, so you will really have to make
> your own comparison.  However our general impressions are as follows:
> 
> 1. In our testing logfs file operations seem to be much slower,
> see http://osl.sed.hu/wiki/ubifs/index.php/IOzone

Shiny numbers!  Performance has improved significantly in the last six
month.  Still worth a closer look.

> 3. logfs does not seem to have bad-block handling.

Bad blocks at mkfs time are handled, blocks turning bad later on aren't
yet.

> 4. logfs does not seem to have wear-leveling.

It does.

JÃrn

-- 
Fools ignore complexity.  Pragmatists suffer it.
Some can avoid it.  Geniuses remove it.
-- Perlis's Programming Proverb #58, SIGPLAN Notices, Sept.  1982
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/