No work has yet been done to optimize V4 for ssd devices.  It would be
straightforward to do it.

Hans

Jure Pečar wrote:

>On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 04:21:46 -0600
>David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Where can I find the paper on why this makes sense?  Because offhand,
>>it doesn't, unless you're hoping that the majority of transactions
>>can be flushed on boot, rather than unrolled.
>>    
>>
>
>Can't point you to any specific paper, but you can imagine running a
>large mailserver for hundreds of tousands of users. Plenty of
>small, random io, almost as much writes as reads. That's where ssd for
>journal makes sense.
> 
>  
>
>>I'm going to assume you aren't talking about v4, since this sounds
>>like a mission-critical production-style environment.  As I
>>understand it, v4 has a completely different way of doing journaling.
>>    
>>
> 
>Right and right.
> 
>  
>
>>I'm replying to you, not because I actually have an answer for you,
>>but because your case seems interesting, and I'm curious how Reiser4
>>handles it.
>>    
>>
>
>Check namesys.com on "wandering logs" :)
>
>  
>
>>Problem is, I see nowhere for this to fit in the current model of
>>Reiser4.  As I understand it, there is no concept of a separate
>>"journal" device, or of writing a file twice, because the vast
>>majority of writes are simply written out to disk in the new
>>location, and then the "commit" is updating the metadata to point to
>>the new location and free the old.
>>    
>>
>
>I suppose this "wandering logs" concept is going to be much better that
>"journal file/device" concept ext3 uses, but right now it sounds like
>it needs some more optimization work.
>
>The cost here we all want to avoid is called seek time. Even today,
>it's still measured in miliseconds and that's a couple orders of
>magnitude more that gigaherzs cpus tick at. Reiser4 is on a good way to
>decrease this cost by spending some more cpu ticks, but because I need
>a solution "yesterday" (welcome to the real world ... or how they
>say:), I'm lookig for a more traditional approach, ssd journal.
>
>
>  
>

Reply via email to