On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:35:45 +0000, Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blue...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> Are there similar optimizations available in BTRFS? >>> >>> There is an SSD mount option available[1]. >>> >>> [1] http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Getting_started#Mount_Options >> >> But what _exactly_ does it do? > > Chris explains the change to favour spatial locality in allocator > behaviour in with '-o ssd'. '-o ssd_spread' does the opposite, where > RMW cycles are higher penalty. Elsewhere IIRC, Chris also said BTRFS > attempts to submit 128KB BIOs where possible (or wishful thinking?): > > http://markmail.org/message/4sq4uco2lghgxzzz
Thanks, that's useful info. What about FS block and metadata alignment, though? Is there a way to leverage the knowledge of erase block size in order to reduce wear and increase performance? Gordan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
