[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bug#40236] [PATCH] doc: Suggest Btrfs with compression instead of ext4

From: Pierre Neidhardt
Subject: [bug#40236] [PATCH] doc: Suggest Btrfs with compression instead of ext4 for root partition.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 11:04:17 +0200

Efraim Flashner <address@hidden> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 09:39:18AM +0200, Pierre Neidhardt wrote:
>> > So compression saves me 26% ([69-51]/69), and deduplication saves me
>> > 62% ([180-69]/180).
>> Thanks for sharing!
>> zstd might give better results.  Any reason you chose lzo over zstd?
> My machine is about 10 years old so I was more concerned than normal
> about the CPU usage. If lz4 was an option I would've gone with that, but
> according to the Arch wiki or some other locations lzo was basically the
> fastest option.

I've tried zstd on an AMD Athlon II X4 635 (2010): it's perfectly
smooth, can't notice any performance drop.  In fact, I wonder if it's
not even faster than before, but it's hard to measure.

Note that Arch Wiki tends to be on the conservative side when it comes
to performance.  I would not use it as a reference for the general case:
it may guide users to sacrifice convenience and features over
unnoticeable performance gains.


Pierre Neidhardt

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]