Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: WAPBL vs. lfs?

Thor Lancelot Simon wrote

... well under half
the maximum throughput of the disk in many such cases -- and that is even
if you don't subtract the extra-writes penalty for the journal (all
metadata is effectively written twice).

The performace degregration of FFS WAPBL journaling is quite noticiable
for slow computers.  Journaling is a sort of "high availablity" feature in
return of cost, for CPU and disk IO handwidth.  I would pick FFS softdep
rather than log which should be carefully intended for application domain
where it does matter.

Toru Nishimura / ALKYL Technology

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index