xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Disable journaling

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Disable journaling
From: Iuri Diniz <iuridiniz@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:12:50 -0200
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=oFRBg5VUXm5kn1htSMje1xmHn806O7ks/00iC8crE2c=; b=KbNVOKKBS1mITQ6ZuSPJzJQ5bkTSruHJu8eSG2CUSIGY0jlwyhTWl4vRqtIL3jk38s zM+ecWG9ptpPxZSkU/pb5L6NfhKXMQOSGg+QxuTNG21a6Hx5pXJ+obvTuz9bZVY05NVL lPYjA7ZAS0hI67Um8OrvRTGTezFDQ3AxEfCiE=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ZuEVz78zYw/pA+7SVS1ZLTRxYRcSmJN55CRzNMDsQd89LdSSVKQUKWfAMxW9AvBITP 9ZOOMsTxyenauX2qD1aNS2sCp+ryEjhllw7Gt2/+98APDsSowHB7C2EpWNEM2MBR8YLH y6ZWXUZPMvq1poHZhYeGpyddwKFWSq/uzG5lw=
In-reply-to: <497E6759.3060300@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <b211fe280901261723h6dd1db69t9d24c8d6774b18bc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <497E6759.3060300@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Hello Eric,

On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Is possible to disable journaling on XFS too?
>
> No, it's not right possible today.  There used to be a sort of config
> option that disabled journaling ages ago, but it's gone now.  Not sure
> it ever worked on Linux.
>
> Ext4 does have an option to disable journaling now, which is
> interesting.


Thanks for this information.


> If I ever have any time I'd like to see how hard it might
> be to allow a mount option to xfs to also make journaling a no-op.
>

I'm new on filesystems but, is there another useful reason for having XFS
with no journaling?

I know that a journaling filesystem will slightly degrade the write
performance because the extra write operation (the write on journaling).


>
> > Thanks in advance
> >
> > [1]
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ext4_benchmarks&num=4
>
> Fatally flawed article FWIW, their bonnie++ results are comically bad
> (you try deleting 8G files on ext3, see if you can do 200 per second)  I
> alerted them to the bonnie++ problems, and explained what they had done
> wrong in the results parsing, and although they link to my email, they
> leave the ridiculous graphs in place.  The iozone results may be better,
> but I'd be very inclined to do my own testing rather than use those
> results right now.


But about the sequential read tests, do you think that are ok?


[[HTML alternate version deleted]]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>