| 1 |
If you're looking for a flexible filesystem, try btrfs. It is quite nice. |
| 2 |
It still needs some help in the performance department, but given a recent |
| 3 |
Linux kernel (say, 3.2) it works wonderfully. I use its snapshots and COW |
| 4 |
functionality the most. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
The only downside to it is that it sometimes is slowish when I do many |
| 7 |
writes in a short period of time. Also, fsync() still takes awhile, so |
| 8 |
applications that use it liberally, such as dpkg, can run very slow. |
| 9 |
Things which use SQLite also suffer under heavy write loads. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
For that reason alone, I wouldn't yet use it on a database server. I would |
| 12 |
use it on a read-mostly file server, however. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
-- |
| 15 |
Sent from my Ice Cream Sandwich-powered HTC G2 |
| 16 |
Please excuse any typos. |
| 17 |
On Mar 2, 2012 12:03 PM, "Paul Hartman" <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com> |
| 18 |
wrote: |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> I'm very interested in NILFS2 and considering using it as rootfs. I |
| 21 |
> read some good reviews and seems to perform okay in benchmarks. The |
| 22 |
> automatic checkpoints/snapshots sounds like it could be useful. (I'm |
| 23 |
> thinking especially to see prior versions of files in /etc for |
| 24 |
> example.) |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Have any of you used NILFS2 and have any failures or success to report? |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> |
Archives