3 ms·

Amazing how much faster f2fs is than btrfs. Now I have some buyer's remorse over using btrfs...

• ilyt 3y ago
  It was always slow-ish compared to traditional ones, same with ZFS in some workloads
  • thewataccount 3y ago
    It's because of the COW I think right?
    • ilyt 3y ago
      Yeah, and in general nice features cost IOPS. Not that it matters all that much on modern hardware, unless you're really trying to get all there is out of it
      • thewataccount 3y ago
        Not sure about ZFS, but going off a graph in the link - BTRFS is like ~3x~4x slower then the other FS's which IMO that's really substantial. Of course it's workload specific but that type of a performance hit is going to effect a lot of workloads.
• rektide 3y ago
  What are you citing or talking about? Neither f2fs nor btrfs show up in the article.
  • kardos 3y ago
    See the reproduced Figure 9
• infamouscow 3y ago
  If you like f2fs, you might also be excited about ssdfs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34939248 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34939248
  • bcrl 3y ago
    Or bcachefs...