> I'd expect the write pattern of Btrfs to be similar to f2fs, with
> respect to sequentiality of new writes.
Ideally yes - though my tests with a Seagate SMR drive suggest
otherwise. Optimizing the write behavior would probably lead to speed
improvements for btrfs on spinning disks.
-
Am 17.07.2016 um 22:10 schrieb Henk Slager:
> What kernel (version) did you use ?
> I hope it included:
> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mkp/linux.git/commit/?h=bugzilla-93581&id=7c4fbd50bfece00abf529bc96ac989dd2bb83ca4
>
> so >= 4.4, as without this patch, it is quite problematic, if
Hello Hendrik,
from my experience btrfs does work as badly with SMR drives (I only had
the opportunity to test on a 8TB Seagate device-managed drive) as ext4.
The initial performance is fine (for a few gigabytes / minutes), but
drops of a cliff as soon as the internal buffer-region for
non-sequent
One small error (see below):
> As the title said, this patch just make raid attr array more readable.
>
> Cc: Liu Bo
> Signed-off-by: Miao Xie
> ---
> fs/btrfs/ctree.h | 10 +-
> fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 22 +-
> fs/btrfs/volumes.c | 47 +++
