Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 May 1999 11:42:49 +0200 (MET DST) | From | David Weinehall <> | Subject | [was: ext2 question] XFS opensourced! |
| |
On Wed, 19 May 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Tue, 18 May 1999, Manfred Spraul wrote: > > >AFAIK, NTFS implements journaling with a logging fs: > >they implemented 2 filesystems: the actual NTFS, and a logging fs > >(called LFS) which is stored in a fixed size file on the volume. > >I guess that the LFS is only written (and read during fsck). > > I guess the LFS is used _only_ for the metadata. > > >The wraparound is a huge problem: you might recall the one of the tweaks > >which Mindcraft did on NT was: > >'set the size of the log to a incredibly large number' (65 MB). > >(the default should be somewhere around 4 MB, but the system gets > >nearly stopped if the log overflows) > > For curiosity: do they defrag it while the system is idle? They should > try in all ways to avoid the log to wrap. Otherwise they are forced to > wait for I/O completation of the wrap-fault-handler. > > But the log-wrap is not the only problem, the other performance problem of > a real logfs is that we are not going to always read _data_ (not only > metadata) in the same order we write things to disk... And we are going to > read _far_ more frequently than writes... > > Anyway a logfs still seems to me something of fun to play with ;).
Slashdot does have its uses... I read there just a couple of hours ago that SGI has/intends to opensource XFS. That'd pretty much solve our need for a fast Journaling filesystem, I think.
Comments?
/David Weinehall _ _ // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |