login
Header Space

 
 

Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system)

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...>, <penberg@...>, Jörn Engel <joern@...>, <ext-adrian.hunter@...>, <jwboyer@...>
Date: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 - 5:57 am

Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:

ext3 for example.

Well, if you are ready to trade performance to compression, then well,
go ahead :-) May be I used too strong wording, but I wanted to say then
use raw flash then. But I'd also consider implementing compression support
for a block based FS. Reiser4 claimed to have it for example.

Well, ok, it still sounds strange for me, but you may use JFFS2 and UBIFS
with block2mtd as well if you really want to.

Yeah, that's a pity :-(

Sure.

Yeah, that's bad. But if you have a bad FTL, surely there is not guarantee
a flash FS will help? Isn't it better to use better hardware?

We did some experiments with MMC cards and we were unable to wear them
out with re-writing the same sectors again and again. This suggests there
_is_ better FTL hardware then that USB stick you was using.

Anyway, your original mail said Logfs can work with block devices. My answer -
UBIFS too, but this is very strange to do this IMO. But OK, it might is not
senseless, sorry for the wording. :-)

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file system), Tomasz Chmielewski, (Tue Apr 1, 4:02 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file s..., Tomasz Chmielewski, (Tue Apr 1, 5:39 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file s..., Artem Bityutskiy, (Tue Apr 1, 5:57 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file s..., Tomasz Chmielewski, (Wed Apr 2, 10:17 am)
speck-geostationary