On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 18:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 4:30 PM Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-an...@yandex.ru>
> > Good for you. But you're trying take take decision for all other peoples, so
> > you
> > need to take into account not everyone has NVMe or SSD. HDDs that many
> > people
> > are also using are much slower. This means your "1 second vs 0.5 second" can
> > easily turn into "5 seconds vs 10 seconds" (and not necessarily linearly).
> I'm not making any claims about sysroot on HDD.

Okay, in this case, unless benchmarks prove BTRFS to be performant enough on HDD
are provided, I suggest the proposal should be modified to exclude HDDs from
being considered as a BTRFS target.

FWIW, I was just thinking about it, and I came up with example you may like
which shows exactly why BTRFS is bad for HDD. Consider development process. It
includes rewriting source files over and over: you do `git checkout foo` and
files are overwritten, you change a file in text editor, and it gets
overwritten. And since BTRFS is CoW, it will always write files to a new place.
As result, after some time, if you try to build the project, it gonna take much
longer time just because BTRFS has to read files from a bunch of different
places, and HDD are really bad at this.

If you take a non-CoW FS, this problem doesn't exist by design.
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 

Reply via email to