On Sat, 2011-12-17 at 13:00 +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > BTW on my ThinkPad T520 I do not perceive performance issues for BTRFS as > /. But then thats located on an Intel SSD 320 where seeks should not > matter much. Okay, that would be consistent with the slow behaviour observed by others on fsync()-heavy workloads. Presumably this produces much more seeky IO patterns than current common filesystems; I wonder if this is a limitation of the current implementation or something that is an inherent properties of the data-structures being used? Cheers, David -- David McBride <dwm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Department of Computing, Imperial College, London -- 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
