On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 05:23:14PM +0200, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 07.07.2014 17:07, C. Michael Pilato wrote: > > On 07/07/2014 10:58 AM, Ivan Zhakov wrote: > >> My technical opinion that FSFS7/log addressing is slower by design, > >> because it's doing more (read index, then read data instead of just > >> read data) and only caching makes them comparable on performance to > >> FSFS6 repositories. > > I'm coming into this kinda late and after two weeks of vacation, so > > please forgive me if I misunderstand the above, but is it true that > > FSFS7 requires some kind of non-trivial caching just to match FSFS6's > > performance? > > Yup.
<from the off> Sounds bad, but then again I remember that wc-ng's projected performance boost over 1.6 has not been evident from the start, either. "It's what you make of it" ?? ~Neels
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
