3 ms·
FSs designed to run on dumb flash exist: https://encrypted.google.com/#q=site:lwn.net+nand+flash+filesystem https://encrypted.google.com/#q=site:lwn.net+nand+fl
by simoncion 11y ago
FSs designed to run on dumb flash exist: https://encrypted.google.com/#q=site:lwn.net+nand+flash+filesystem https://encrypted.google.com/#q=site:lwn.net+nand+flash+file...
> I don't see why people try to design filesystems that do everything.
For general use, [0] I would rather use a FS that works on pretty much every media type [1] -and has reasonable perf- than to have to worry about whether $SPECIALTY_FS is actually tuned for $WEIRDO_BLOCK_DEVICE, or if I've failed to understand the particulars of either the FS, device, or both.
[0] That is, when getting the absolute best perf isn't a requirement.
[1] Except for like, tape, and optical RAM/WORM drives, natch.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoI don't mind having a filesystem that works reasonably well on most devices. But I would consider "being able to append to a file reasonably quickly" as part of that "reasonably well". Note that it's entirely possible to have a filesystem that's actually several different filesystems with a magic selector. (I mean, block sizes and reserved block percentages and inline inodes already are along those lines)
- simoncion 11y agoIf your underlying device is slow -as SD cards are notorious for being for any use case other than picture or video storage and retrieval-, no amount of FS juju can help you.