On Oct 20, 2012, at 11:22 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Tue 2012-10-16 13:07:03, Sooman Jeong wrote: >> >> This is a brief summary of our initial filesystem performance study of f2fs >> against existing two filesystems in linux: EXT4, NILFS2, and f2fs. >> > > Hmm, flashes are actually optimized for VFAT, right? Can you compare > against that? >
Do you mean SD-cards? Because, as I can understand, "raw" flash (I mean NAND chip) hasn't any special filesystem-related optimization. Moreover, as I know, this optimization takes place in the begin of device (because FAT metadata is placed in the volume's begin). But if you have several partition on a device then you haven't any optimizations for second and next FAT partitions. So, in-place modified metadata of f2fs is placed in the begin of the volume also. Or, maybe, do you mean some another special optimization for VFAT? > What about something more complex like "untar of kernel tree"? > Yes, it is very interesting use-case. Maybe, kernel compilation can be complimentary synthetic benchmark. :-) With the best regards, Vyacheslav Dubeyko. > Ouch and... thanks for doing this. > Pavel > > -- > (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek > (cesky, pictures) > http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
