Re: [gentoo-user] Fast file system for cache directory with lot's of files

[Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:05 PM, Pandu Poluan <pandu@poluan.info> wrote:
>
> On Aug 14, 2012 11:42 PM, "Helmut Jarausch" <jarausch@igpm.rwth-aachen.de>
> 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.
>>
>
> Are the support tools for btrfs (fsck, defrag, etc.) already complete?

Do they exist? Yes (sys-fs/btrfs-progs). Are they complete? Probably not...