> > On Fri, 9 Nov 2012, Jason White <[email protected]> wrote: > > What's the final story about Btrfs fragmentation? There was > > controversy surrounding it a few years ago, but I don't know what the > > conclusions were in the end. > > The important issue is to determine what your applications are doing with > files. > > The most heavily loaded systems I run at the moment are mail servers. They > typically have writes outnumbering reads by a factor of about 9:1. The > majority of email is never read from disk, it's either read by the user and > deleted while it's still in the cache, copied to an offline-IMAP system while > it's > still in the cache, or automatically deleted from the spam folder before the > user notices that it's there. > > For such use the way BTRFS defragments writes and fragments reads is a > feature not a bug! >
I keep most of my email, and it's all highly indexed and very quickly searchable. James _______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main
