lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/7] OMFS filesystem version 3
On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 12:37:31PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> I don't feel strongly either way, and Christoph's arguments against
> fuse are mostly valid (although neither of them are serious).

I don't have hard numbers, but anecdotally my FUSE version is quite
a bit less performant. That's no criticism of FUSE - I just haven't
put the time into optimizing and adding various caches.

> There's one thing which makes fuse a slightly better candidate for
> applications where the number of users is low: stability. Unless you
> or your users test the hell out of your filesystem, there always a
> chance that some bugs will remain.

Sure, though this FS won't see the same kind of use as ext2. Most users
would just mount it, copy a bunch of files, then unmount it, and if that
works then great.

It has at least seen some testing with fsx, though I had to turn off most
of the checks since growing truncate is still unimplemented.

--
Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-14 02:49    [W:0.285 / U:0.968 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site