On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:01:48 +1000 Lindsay Roberts wrote:
> * Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
This should be a separate patch.
> * Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
> block aligned regular file data to bring performance
> parity with ext2/3. This is
On Mon, Aug 06, 2007 at 05:43:54PM +1000, Lindsay Roberts wrote:
> On 7/26/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If the fs is read-only.. can we do some tail packing and get _both_
> > speed and space efficiency?
>
> You mean don't block align files of size less than 1k, and
> intelligen
On 7/26/07, Pavel Machek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If the fs is read-only.. can we do some tail packing and get _both_
> speed and space efficiency?
You mean don't block align files of size less than 1k, and
intelligently pack them into the gaps left by files that are aligned?
Does seem that mo
On 07/30/2007 08:12 PM, Phillip Susi wrote:
Lindsay Roberts wrote:
* Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
* Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
block aligned regular file data to bring performance
parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of the read
speed of
Lindsay Roberts wrote:
* Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
* Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
block aligned regular file data to bring performance
parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of the read
speed of the existing romfs.
Why does block alignment
Hi!
> >> > block aligned regular file data to bring
> >performance
> >> > parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of the read
> >> > speed of the existing romfs.
> >
> >Doesn't that make these filesystems much bigger? By, on
> >average, .5k
> >per file? Or, if I'm understanding things corre
Tim Bird wrote:
Lindsay Roberts wrote:
Yes, my experience has been that it has been almost chillingly close
to .5k per regular file increase in partition size. I know in
applications in which size is utterly critical this may be slightly
unattractive, but in cases where romfs is chosen for its
Lindsay Roberts wrote:
> Yes, my experience has been that it has been almost chillingly close
> to .5k per regular file increase in partition size. I know in
> applications in which size is utterly critical this may be slightly
> unattractive, but in cases where romfs is chosen for its byte
> repro
On 7/18/07, Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
> > block aligned regular file data to bring performance
> > parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of the read
> > speed of the existing romfs.
Doesn't that make these filesyste
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 01:36:35AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:01:48 +1000 "Lindsay Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > * Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
That seems worthwhile.
> > * Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
> >
On Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:01:48 +1000 "Lindsay Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
> * Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
> block aligned regular file data to bring performance
> parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of
* Increases romfs partition size limit from 2GB to 4GB.
* Adds new derivative of romfs filesystem (rom2fs) with
block aligned regular file data to bring performance
parity with ext2/3. This is about 225% of the read
speed of the existing romfs.
Signed-off-by: Lindsay Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
12 matches
Mail list logo
