That startup time test seems a little sus for BTRFS
Yes, it seems like there could be a weakness there, unless it’s just a fluke. The test has a background I/O load designed to stress BFQ I/O.
Yes, I’m surprised it is so bad considering btrfs was close to the other fs on most benchmarks.
It’s not just startup time, it’s startup time with heavy background I/O
Very much so.
deleted by creator
If you’re from the EU you can just reject all cookies and all ads disappear.
Kent just made a reply on this.
TL;DR: Fast on his machine. The reason of the difference is unclear though.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Bcachefs has long been in development by Kent Overstreet as a new open-source file-system born out of the Linux kernel’s block cache code.
For about a decade now it’s been in the works as a modern copy-on-write file-system with aims to compete with the likes of Btrfs and ZFS.
After it was merged I built a fresh Linux Git build with the Bcachefs file-system driver enabled.
I tried a few different combinations like with different partition setups and other options, but ultimately was stuck with this “numerical out of range” errors each time regardless of what I tried.
If there is sufficient interest from readers, as follow-up articles may be multi-disk testing and looking at other advanced features of Bcachefs.
But for today’s article and just getting an idea where this experimental file-system is currently at, it was a single disk and testing defaults for some sane representation.
The original article contains 563 words, the summary contains 148 words. Saved 74%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Bot can’t detect multi-page articles eh
