> It doesn't use compression so not relevant to the cited statement?

Well the paper compares  ext2, ext4, xfs, f2fs, and btrfs in terms of IO 
amplification and states:
"In fact, in all our experiments, btrfs was an outlier, producing the highest 
read, write, and space amplification."
The results listed in Tables 1 and 2 show that btrfs does incur higher amounts 
of IO, so even with compression it's not at all obvious that this would bring 
btrfs down to levels comparable to (or lower than) the other file systems. 
Hence I believe Vitaly is linking this paper to suggest that evidence is needed 
before we can confidently assert that btrfs + compression is better at 
preserving nand than using ext4 or xfs.
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