News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Linux w/ reiserfs 3.x vs a SUN SAN 7410 running solaris a... by ajross on Tuesday October 20, 2009 @07:11PM (#893571)
Isn't that feature (managing storage so you don't have to) precisely the reason for using a "filesystem" in the first place? Your suggestion is isomorphic to telling the poster to chuck the filesystem and just write to the block device directly. It's almost certainly not a sane real-world option.
Re:Linux w/ reiserfs 3.x vs a SUN SAN 7410 running solaris a... by termie on Wednesday October 21, 2009 @01:19AM (#894099)
This guy is already @366M objects and growing... halving or quartering the number for file i/os in a large system like this has real, observable and proven benefit. It's definitely not for the meek, but adding another directory (and adding an additional metadata lookup) is not the way to go. When you get to more than a billion objects all requiring 5+ metadata entries that need to get walked on every request, you might see it differently.
Re:Linux w/ reiserfs 3.x vs a SUN SAN 7410 running solaris a... by ajross on Wednesday October 21, 2009 @11:29AM (#894831)
No, that's silly. You're not changing the number of I/O operations at all. You're simply moving the location in code where they are done from the kernel's filesystem to the applications's userspace. There's no reason to expect either to be faster by anything other than a constant factor.
Re:Linux w/ reiserfs 3.x vs a SUN SAN 7410 running solaris a... by apgwoz on Tuesday October 20, 2009 @09:41PM (#893773)
Isn't what both of you are describing a filesystem in itself?