On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:43:59 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > As I mentioned, some techniques like log-structured filesystem could > > perform generally better on any kind of flash-based storage with FTL. > > Although there are many kinds of FTL, it is commonly true that > > it performs well under workload where sequential write is dominant. > > Yes, it's certainly possible that we _could_ write a file system which > is specifically targeted at FTL -- I was just wondering why anyone would > _bother_ :) Haven't you done that already? JFFS2 write behaviour is the best-case scenario for any FTL. When the delta cache is finished, LogFS will be pretty close to that as well. Not sure if anyone would specifically target FTL. Being well-suited for those beasts is just a side-effect. The FTL is still a net loss. Without that FAT enabling layer a real flash filesystem would be more efficient. Jörn -- Prosperity makes friends, adversity tries them. -- Publilius Syrus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
