Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Jun 2008 13:06 UTC, submitted by sharkscott
"In a recent article, Linux File Systems: Ready for the Future?, Henry Newman expands on what he feels are shortcomings in current GNU/Linux filesystems. Specifically, he believes current Linux filesystem technology cannot meet the demands that massive implementations of 100TB or larger require. He states he received some emotional responses trying to either refute his information or impugn his character, although those comments do not show on either of the article's pages. This prompted me to get the real scoop on how Linux filesystem technology is trying to keep pace with the ever-growing need for storage space."
Thread beginning with comment 318074
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: and the winner is ?
by raver31 on Wed 11th Jun 2008 18:12
in reply to "RE[3]: and the winner is ?"
Member since:2005-07-06
I agree with you, but if you read the original posting, I was saying this is my results under Ubuntu 8.04.
Personally I like XFS with noatime, and as this is my desktop machine, and only me uses it, I rarely need to know when a file was last accessed.
But, you are correct, the example I gave was just thrown together quickly and cannot be called realworld testing, as I never published any timings, I just quoted my opinion. These were based on the delay between clicking a program or a file to open, and the thing actually appearing.
So far, from what I have tried, it appears that Ubuntu 8.04 is optimised to use ext3 over all other filesystems.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-07-06
So how can we verify that daft 'test' that you've done above and reproduce whatever it is that you've actually found? The noatime option you can add for just about any filesystem, so what you've got there means very little, if anything. All it does is eliminate the update of when a file was last accessed (sometimes necessary), which is a huge speed improvement, but I note that you haven't done that for the other filesystems you've bitched about. relatime is probably a safer option, but squashing the atime problem on any filesystem is the biggest thing you can do to boost performance, even over file stripe aligning.
If you think you're describing real world testing then I shudder. I really do.
Edited 2008-06-10 22:23 UTC