Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 21 Dec 2009 19:48:30 -0700
From:      Ben Schumacher <benschumacher@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-fs <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Plans for Logged/Journaled UFS
Message-ID:  <9859143f0912211848n447183dfs7e0e4bd02e52c5ad@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B302A6D.3000408@modulus.org>
References:  <712903.15604.qm@web113517.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <3612709F-15CA-4A59-86B1-2674BAA2936D@gmail.com> <240049.46806.qm@web113517.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0912220000360.73550@fledge.watson.org> <4B302A6D.3000408@modulus.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Dec 21, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Andrew Snow <andrew@modulus.org> wrote:
> Is there any provision to put the journal on a seperate device? =C2=A0Thi=
s can
> solve the performance degradation issue.

I'm not sure that would provide much more reliability, however. If
you're adding a second device to use the journal you risk losing data
if either device fails... given how small the data is (I believe 32
bytes per entry), I'm not sure it's really worthwhile. Most of what
I've read in the past about FreeBSD's FS interactions seems to imply
that the lower-level (ATA-layer) is not terribly optimized for larger
drives and faster interfaces available these days. I'm sure I could go
Google up some references, but I think it's been well covered in the
past.

Cheers,
Ben



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9859143f0912211848n447183dfs7e0e4bd02e52c5ad>