|
|
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
Mike Fedyk wrote:
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:I'm looking to try BTRFS on a SSD, and I would like to know what SSD optimizations it applies. Is there a comprehensive list of what ssd mount option does? How are the blocks and metadata arranged? Are there options available comparable to ext2/ext3 to help reduce wear and improve performance? Specifically, on ext2 (journal means more writes, so I don't use ext3 on SSDs, since fsck typically only takes a few seconds when access time is < 100us), I usually apply the -b 4096 -E stripe-width = (erase_block/4096) parameters to mkfs in order to reduce the multiple erase cycles on the same underlying block. Are there similar optimizations available in BTRFS?I think you'll get more out of btrfs, but another thing you can look into is ext4 without the journal. Support was added for that recently (thanks to google).
How is this different to using mkfs.ext2 from e4fsprogs?And while I appreciate hopeful remarks along the lines of "I think you'll get more out of btrfs", I am really after specifics of what the ssd mount option does, and what features comparable to the optimizations that can be done with ext2/3/4 (e.g. the mentioned stripe-width option) are available to get the best possible alignment of data and metadata to increase both performance and life expectancy of a SSD.
Also, for drives that don't support TRIM, is there a way to make the FS apply aggressive re-use of erased space (in order to help the drive's internal wear-leveling)?
I have looked through the documentation and the wiki, but it provides very little of actual substance.
Gordan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
|