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

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: H. Peter Anvin
Date: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 - 9:27 am

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, 1:02 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file ..., Tomasz Chmielewski, (Tue Apr 1, 2:39 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file ..., H. Peter Anvin, (Tue Apr 1, 9:27 am)
Re: UBIFS vs Logfs (was [RFC PATCH] UBIFS - new flash file ..., Tomasz Chmielewski, (Wed Apr 2, 7:17 am)