On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 18:41 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 4:30 PM Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-angel@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Good for you. But you're trying take take decision for all other peoples, so > > you > > need to take into account not everyone has NVMe or SSD. HDDs that many > > people > > are also using are much slower. This means your "1 second vs 0.5 second" can > > easily turn into "5 seconds vs 10 seconds" (and not necessarily linearly). > > I'm not making any claims about sysroot on HDD. Okay, in this case, unless benchmarks prove BTRFS to be performant enough on HDD are provided, I suggest the proposal should be modified to exclude HDDs from being considered as a BTRFS target. FWIW, I was just thinking about it, and I came up with example you may like which shows exactly why BTRFS is bad for HDD. Consider development process. It includes rewriting source files over and over: you do `git checkout foo` and files are overwritten, you change a file in text editor, and it gets overwritten. And since BTRFS is CoW, it will always write files to a new place. As result, after some time, if you try to build the project, it gonna take much longer time just because BTRFS has to read files from a bunch of different places, and HDD are really bad at this. If you take a non-CoW FS, this problem doesn't exist by design. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
