On 17.05.2010, at 15:09, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 05/17/2010 08:02 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> My concern is that ext3 exaggerates the cost of fsync() which will result >>> in diminishing value over time for this feature as people move to >>> ext4/btrfs. >>> >> There will be ext3 file systems for years out. Just because people can use >> better and faster file systems doesn't mean they do. And I'm sure they can't >> always choose. If anything, I can try and see what the numbers look like for >> xfs. >> > > But ext3 with barrier=1 is pretty uncommon in practice. Another data point > would be an ext3 host file system with barrier=0.
Who defines what is common and what not? To me, the SLES11 default is common. In fact, the numbers in the referred mail were done on an 11.1 system. Alex
