Subject: Re: Journaling for FFS
To: None <>
From: Jochen Kunz <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 10/02/2006 21:09:49
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:26:04 -0700
Bill Studenmund <> wrote:

> If someone wants to work on journaling for ffs, please don't
> discourage  him or her.
> LFS and FFS work well for different work loads. There are workloads
> for  which either one of them will blow the other away. As such,
> neither one  will replace the other for performance use under certain
> workloads; we  need both.
This is a good point. I didn't think of this. The same for Jorgen
Lundman's remark about adding jornaling to FFS like a mount option just
like softdeps.

Matt: Go for it! :-)
(One thing to take into consideration: It may be more valuable to have
jornaling for FFSv2 first, then for FFSv1. A FFSv2 can be much larger
then a FFSv1...)