Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (776 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Re: [opensuse-kernel] BtrFS as default fs?
  • From: Claudio Freire <klaussfreire@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2013 14:33:05 -0300
  • Message-id: <CAGTBQpbfJO=iM44HNiuCkiU4v4cnUKp4HR1DfMywhXUN+4jWsw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Michael Schroeder <mls@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 07:04:35PM +0200, Matthias G. Eckermann wrote:
I am afraid, we have a wording issue here:

When Dave says "Scalability" in that presentations, he
means "Performance" (see his slides).

When I say "Scalability" above, and use that word
comparing btrfs to the current openSUSE default, I am not
talking Performance, but talking about "Scalability" in
the sense of filesystem size, dealing with huge amounts of
(small) files, ...

Hope this explains the different view.

Not really. "Scalability" in the sense of huge amounts of small
files sense means exactly "Performance" for me, as that's where
XFS before was dog slow, i.e. it didn't *scale".


Scalability is a heavily abused word.

There's both kinds of scalability. Ability to store huge amount of
small files. Ability to store small amount of huge files, or huge
filesystems overall (PB-size). Performance under those constraints,
both in terms of speed, access times, and also in terms of space
efficiency. There's also ability and performance when recovering from
failure scenarios, which is important on a server.

So... the area of scalability is huge, no pun intended.

How does BtrFS compare against ext234/XFS? Hard to know on an evolving
implementation. Today's benchmarks will be outdated tomorrow. And no
single benchmark can cover it all.

I'd suggest people use 13.1 to do those benchmarks, but I think I already did.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >