On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Daniel Taylor <Daniel.Taylor@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Just an FYI reminder. The original test (2K files) is utterly > pathological for disk drives with 4K physical sectors, such as > those now shipping from WD, Seagate, and others. Some of the > SSDs have larger (16K0 or smaller blocks (2K). There is also > the issue of btrfs over RAID (which I know is not entirely > sensible, but which will happen). > > The absolute minimum allocation size for data should be the same > as, and aligned with, the underlying disk block size. If that > results in underutilization, I think that's a good thing for > performance, compared to read-modify-write cycles to update > partial disk blocks. Block size = 4k Btrfs packs smaller objects into the blocks in certain cases. -- 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
