login
Header Space

 
 

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

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind@...>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...>, Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@...>, LKML <linux-kernel@...>, <penberg@...>, Jörn Engel <joern@...>, <ext-adrian.hunter@...>, <jwboyer@...>
Date: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 - 12:27 pm

Artem Bityutskiy wrote:

Well, even auto-levelling storage should benefit from a filesystem which 
minimizes the total number of flash sectors churned, which means doing 
as few writes as possible and to large, contiguous sections.

	-hpa
--
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..., H. Peter Anvin, (Tue Apr 1, 12:27 pm)
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..., Tomasz Chmielewski, (Wed Apr 2, 10:17 am)
speck-geostationary