Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC] [PATCH] Reducing average ext2 fsck time through fs-wide dirty bit]

On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 05:55:03PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
Valerie Henson <val_henson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

ext2 is simpler and faster than ext3 in many cases. This is sort of
cheating; ext2 is simpler and faster because it makes no effort to
maintain on-disk consistency and can skip annoying things like, oh,
reserving space in the journal. I am looking for ways to make ext2
cheat even more.


But it might be feasible to knock up an ext3-- in which all the journal
operations are stubbed out.

Hmm... Could we get the mark_buffer_dirty/mark_inode_dirty logic
right? Probably create a list in the stubbed journal functions and
then mark them dirty in the journal close? However, half the reason
I'm working on ext2 is the simplicity of the code - stubbing it out
would solve the performance problem but not the complexity problem.

Note that ext3's habit of clearing indirect blocks on truncate would
break some things I want to do in the future. (Insert secret plans
here.)

-VAL
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages