Re: fstrim on BTRFS

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

 



On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:21:14 +0700
"Fajar A. Nugraha" <list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 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.

Modern controllers (like the SandForce you mentioned) do their own wear leveling 'under the hood', i.e. the same user-visible sectors DO NOT neccessarily map to the same locations on the flash at all times; and introducing 'manual' wear leveling by additional rewriting is not a good idea, it's just going to wear it out more.


-- 
With respect,
Roman

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Stallman had a printer,
with code he could not see.
So he began to tinker,
and set the software free."

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[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