[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How git performs when you throw all of Debian at it

On Sat, 2013-08-31 at 01:21 +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:14:25PM +0000, Luca Filipozzi wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:49:48PM +0200, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > > Steven Chamberlain <steven@pyro.eu.org> writes:
> > > > Wouldn't ZFS be a more natural way to do something like this?
> > > Possibly, but I have zero hopes of getting it set up and supported by
> > > DSA, so we can’t use it for this service.
> > 
> > To address this specific thread, the challenge with ZFS is not that we don't
> > like the idea (I'm keen on it, actually) but that it's not in the Linux kernel.
> > We prefer to use stock Debian kernels than custom-built kernels or modules for
> > our machines.
> > 
> > Is there another filesystem (or another approach) that would improve
> > performance?
> Funny that you ask.  What's the usual competitor for ZFS?
> btrfs is included in stock kernels, doesn't take massive amounts of memory,
> and has a different approach to deduplication.

and is slower than any of its competitors.  (But at least it doesn't
have an incompatible licence.)

> Recent kernels are needed only for race-free deduplication, "cp --reflink"
> works in oldstable.

Please don't suggest using the squeeze or wheezy version of btrfs in


Ben Hutchings
If God had intended Man to program,
we'd have been born with serial I/O ports.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: