Re: fstrim on BTRFS

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Martin Steigerwald wrote:

>> With 3.2-rc4 (probably earlier), Ext4 seems to remember what areas it
>> trimmed:

>> But BTRFS does not:


> There's no such plan, but it's do-able, and I can take care of it.
> There's an issue though.

> For btrfs this issue can't be solved without disk format change that
> will break older kernels, but only 3.2-rcX kernels will be affected if
> we push the following change into mainline before 3.2 release.

Slightly off-topic, how useful would trim be for btrfs when using
newer SSD which have their own garbage collection and wear leveling
(e.g. sandforce-based)?

I'm trying fstrim and my disk is now pegged at write IOPS. Just
wondering if maybe a "btrfs fi balance" would be more useful, since:
- with trim, used space will remain used. Thus future writes will only
utilized space marked as "free", making them wear faster
- with "btrfs fi balance", btrfs will move the data around so (to some
degree) the currently-unused space will be used, and  currently-used
space will be unused, which will improve wear leveling.

-- 
Fajar
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux