| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:59 am Post subject: Comparsion of different filesystems for portage. Save space! |
 |
|
Hi guys
I wrote a report about different filesystems for the portage directory. Some parts of it might be quite interesting for you. Although I'm not sure if I shall post it in the Tips and Tricks section.
You can find the report on my homepage.
Thanks for having a look at it.
I'm looking forward to every comment and feedback, so I can improve it or correct mistakes.
Phlogiston
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20067
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm. I skipped to the charts, then went back to where you covered what fses were being tested. I'm not interested in reiser or xfs, so can't say its helpful to me.
With the cost of disk space these days, 'saving space' seems about as pointless as 'not needing a journaling fs for portage, because you can just sync.'
It'd be handy if you could add ext3 along with some others, just as points of reference. At any rate, a generally interesting topic.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9527
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Would be interesting to see how squashfs would fit into this speedwise (it would definitely win the size contest  ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Monkeh
Veteran
Joined: 06 Aug 2005
Posts: 1656
Location: England
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Genone wrote: | | Would be interesting to see how squashfs would fit into this speedwise (it would definitely win the size contest ) |
Doubt it could be much slower than ReiserFS.. (my old machine's install using reiser for / is unusably slow) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Genone wrote: | | Would be interesting to see how squashfs would fit into this speedwise (it would definitely win the size contest ) |
I'm sorry but where can I find squashfs? Whats the point about it? I'll read some docs... 
/edit: Ok I found it in menuconfig So now I need some infos about how to use it...
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2006 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: |
With the cost of disk space these days, 'saving space' seems about as pointless as 'not needing a journaling fs for portage, because you can just sync.'
It'd be handy if you could add ext3 along with some others, just as points of reference. At any rate, a generally interesting topic. |
I really agree to the first point.
About ext3, I have some data about ext3, but they are nearly the same as ext2, because in general ext3 is just ext2 with journal
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Phlogiston wrote: | | Genone wrote: | | Would be interesting to see how squashfs would fit into this speedwise (it would definitely win the size contest ) |
I'm sorry but where can I find squashfs? Whats the point about it? I'll read some docs...
/edit: Ok I found it in menuconfig So now I need some infos about how to use it... |
/edit2: Of course squashfs could be intersting but all in all it does not seem like it would be usable:
| Quote: | | [...] Squashfs is a read-only file system that lets you compress whole file systems or single directories, write them to other devices/partitions or to ordinary file [...] |
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9527
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, if we ever figure out a way to create usable deltas between two squashfs images it could become very useful. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
truekaiser
l33t
Joined: 05 Mar 2004
Posts: 801
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
hmm i think this is a good idea for the perfomance alone.
*keeps this thread in mind for next install. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaveQ
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Feb 2005
Posts: 225
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What about unionfs? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PaveQ wrote: | | What about unionfs? |
Would unionfs have a purpose for using it for portage?
I don't know much about unionfs.
| Quote: |
Unionfs is a stackable unification file system, which can
appear to merge the contents of several directories (branches),
while keeping their physical content separate.
<http://www.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu/project-unionfs.html>
|
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
makomk
n00b
Joined: 15 Jul 2005
Posts: 46
Location: Not all there
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Genone wrote: | | Would be interesting to see how squashfs would fit into this speedwise (it would definitely win the size contest ) |
It does - about 30M for a complete copy of Portage. The speed doesn't seem too bad, either (though I haven't carried out any formal tests) - could be because, in Squashfs 2.1, the directories are apparently sorted and (optionally) indexed. I eventually gave up on it because my hacked mksquashfs (which supported reading from uncompressed tarballs) truncated long paths.
| Genone wrote: | | Well, if we ever figure out a way to create usable deltas between two squashfs images it could become very useful. |
Should be theoretically possible; I keep meaning to figure out the structure of squashfs and create a delta-generator, but never find the time. It'd be very neat - you could just download a small delta file, apply it to the old squashfs image, and use the result as-is.
Edit:
| Phlogiston wrote: | | Would unionfs have a purpose for using it for portage? |
One of the ways you could produce an updated squashfs image is to mount a read-write filesystem over the top using unionfs, run "emerge --sync", and then use mksquashfs to generate the new image. I'm not sure how well this works in practice; IIRC some people tried this and had problems with it for some reason.
Last edited by makomk on Sat Mar 04, 2006 7:44 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phlogiston
Veteran
Joined: 27 Jan 2004
Posts: 1925
Location: Europe, Swizerland
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 18, 2006 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There's a howto for squashfs here. It takes about 50Mb's
_________________
Workstation: 5.1 SurroundSound, LIRC remote control; Laptop [IBM-T43]: patched sources, s2disk/ram, fingerprint sensor |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
