From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E2321381F4 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:34:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6E5DD21C018; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from icp-osb-irony-out8.external.iinet.net.au (icp-osb-irony-out8.external.iinet.net.au [203.59.1.225]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5091121C004 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 07:31:58 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EAOtPK1B8qTsP/2dsb2JhbABFhgG0K4EHgiABAQUjZgsNCwICJgICV4glDKVskzyBIYllgzuCCoESA4hMklsiihKCbA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,772,1336320000"; d="scan'208";a="23644240" Received: from unknown (HELO moriah.localdomain) ([124.169.59.15]) by icp-osb-irony-out8.iinet.net.au with ESMTP; 15 Aug 2012 15:31:56 +0800 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by moriah.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BD4922BB51 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:31:56 +0800 (WST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at lan.localdomain Received: from moriah.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (moriah.lan.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9j2NRS2jPo4c for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:31:51 +0800 (WST) Received: from [192.168.48.1] (troll [192.168.48.1]) by moriah.localdomain (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AF82313E0 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:31:50 +0800 (WST) Message-ID: <1345015910.9724.3.camel@troll> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Fast file system for cache directory with lot's of files From: Bill Kenworthy To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:31:50 +0800 In-Reply-To: <1344962187.18169.0@numa-i> References: <1344962187.18169.0@numa-i> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Archives-Salt: 3de52730-6c39-4abd-bb0b-a3294df495b6 X-Archives-Hash: 746f321db4213db5238917a9891c8543 On Tue, 2012-08-14 at 18:36 +0200, Helmut Jarausch wrote: > On 08/14/2012 04:07:39 AM, Adam Carter wrote: > > > I think btrfs probably is meant to provide a lot of the modern > > > features like reiser4 or xfs > > > > Unfortunately btrfs is still generally slower than ext4 for example. > > Checkout http://openbenchmarking.org/, eg > > http://openbenchmarking.org/s/ext4%20btrfs > > > > The OS will use any spare RAM for disk caching, so if there's not much > > else running on that box, most of your content will be served from > > RAM. It may be that whatever fs you choose wont make that much of a > > difference anyways. > > > > If one can run a recent kernel (3.5.x) btrfs seems quite stable (It's > used by some distribution and Oracle for real work) > Most benchmark don't use compression since other FS can't use it. But > that's unfair. With compression, one needs to read > much less data (my /usr partition has less than 50% of an ext4 > partition, savings with the root partition are even higher). > > I'm using the mount options > compress=lzo,noacl,noatime,autodefrag,space_cache which require a > recent kernel. > > I'd give it a try. > > Helmut. > > Whats the latest on fsck tools for BTRFS? - useful ones are still not available right? Reason I am asking is that is not an easy question to google, and my last attempt to use BTRFS for serious work ended in tears when I couldn't rescue a corrupted file system. BillK