Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
SSD: which filesystem ?
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
xavier10
Guru
Guru


Joined: 19 Jan 2004
Posts: 485
Location: Paris, France

PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:03 am    Post subject: SSD: which filesystem ? Reply with quote

Hello,

I am considering an SSD based laptop, which I would install Gentoo on. I am wondering about support issues with SSD drives and Linux, and what decisions should be made.
In particular, what about the filesystems ? Are all filesystems ok for SSDs or are some preferable to others ?
How do they impact on wear of the SSD ?

Another thing I feel bad about is the swap: is it ok to swap on an SSD ? It seems to me this is a very bad decision due to the wear it may incur on the drive ?
For that reason, I am considering having no swap at all (and taking a decent amount of RAM to begin with, of course!).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
massimo
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 22 Jun 2003
Posts: 1226

PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[1] is a list of filesystems which you might want to consider. Since the EEE (small ASUS notebooks (not all) with SSD) community deals with similar questions you might want to browse their wikis and forums for opinions when running an OS (e.g. Linux) on a SSD.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_file_systems#Flash_memory_.2F_solid_state_media_file_systems
_________________
Hello 911? How are you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jesnow
l33t
l33t


Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 895

PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 9:23 am    Post subject: Re: SSD: which filesystem ? Reply with quote

The idea of the SSD is that it mimics, and can mimic a normal drive. I used ext3 and it worked fine, I get 123MB/sec throughput on my OCX ssd, as opposed to 80MB/sec on my samsung spinpoint 500GB sata drive. Some things are *much* faster though, and watching a silent emerge --sync is cool.

BUT I'd be curious too what the *optimum* fs would be.

xavier10 wrote:
Hello,

I am considering an SSD based laptop, which I would install Gentoo on. I am wondering about support issues with SSD drives and Linux, and what decisions should be made.
In particular, what about the filesystems ? Are all filesystems ok for SSDs or are some preferable to others ?
How do they impact on wear of the SSD ?

Another thing I feel bad about is the swap: is it ok to swap on an SSD ? It seems to me this is a very bad decision due to the wear it may incur on the drive ?
For that reason, I am considering having no swap at all (and taking a decent amount of RAM to begin with, of course!).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
drescherjm
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 Jun 2004
Posts: 2790
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA

PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Another thing I feel bad about is the swap: is it ok to swap on an SSD ? It seems to me this is a very bad decision due to the wear it may incur on the drive ?


I would not worry about this. All descent SSDs have wear leveling. And this will generally increase the life of the device to 3 years or more of continuous (24/7) writing to the drive.
_________________
John

My gentoo overlay
Instructons for overlay
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dagger
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 11 Jun 2003
Posts: 765
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 10:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm using 4xSSD (OCZ 128GB) in raid (1+0) array for postgresql database.

SSD aren't super fast in constant reads (only around ~250MB/sec) comparing to SAS array (~320MB/sec), but random access time is awesome (~2ns comparing to ~12ns)
I've got over 500m records in my database and very complicated queries take around ~10 min on SAS array and ~4 min on SSD.

I've been testing these drivers before I put them into the array, and they behave very similar to traditional drives. So generally speaking FS choice should depend on your needs.
I needed very fast random access, so I've chosen reiserfs. For general use ext or xfs should be good.

As drescherjm mentioned I wouldn't really care about lifetime because current generation of drives have longer lifetime than average laptop.
_________________
95% of all computer errors occur between chair and keyboard (TM)
Join the FSF as an Associate Member!
Post under CC license.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pdw_hu
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Posts: 200
Location: Budapest, Hungary

PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'll be getting an OCZ SSD for my laptop soon.

1. What do you think about Ext4 w/o journal? As it's a laptop the only data loss it might endure is near lock-ups, but sysrq can usually at least do a sync before rebooting it.

2. Move /usr/portage to the now freed HDD connected through USB (or FireWire).

3. Mount /var/tmp/portage into tmpfs.

4. Using noatime.


Any other tips?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OneOfOne
Guru
Guru


Joined: 28 May 2003
Posts: 368

PostPosted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd recommend btrfs and mount with compress,ssd.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
s4e8
Guru
Guru


Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 311

PostPosted: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OneOfOne wrote:
I'd recommend btrfs and mount with compress,ssd.

btrfs will eat your SSD very quickly. It write data constantly even in an idle system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
HeissFuss
Guru
Guru


Joined: 11 Jan 2005
Posts: 414

PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

btrfs will also eat your children. It's not very stable atm.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
poly_poly-man
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 06 Dec 2006
Posts: 2477
Location: RIT, NY, US

PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ext2 or minix.
_________________
iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAA

avatar: new version of logo - see topic 838248. Potentially still a WiP.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
d2_racing
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 13047
Location: Ste-Foy,Canada

PostPosted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ext2, in fact, you don't need to log the change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ial
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 27 Dec 2008
Posts: 161
Location: Warsaw (Warszawa)

PostPosted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

and what about Reiser4?
especially with its compression set on -- will the transparent compression move the burden away slightly from stressing the actual physical medium rather into operations located more within buffer/RAM ? I mean, files before a write are compressed significantly in fs buffer so afterall much less resulting data is physically engraved on SSD medium, and much fewer NAND cells are being worn, is that correct?

s4e8 wrote:
btrfs will eat your SSD very quickly. It write data constantly even in an idle system.

I hope Reiser4 does not behave that ugly...?

BTW. What does the option "SSD Mode" mean in Btrfs and how does it improve SSD wear friendliness? Will Btrfs under this option more or less wear physical media than ext2?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Need4Speed
Guru
Guru


Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 497

PostPosted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 3:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

s4e8 wrote:
OneOfOne wrote:
I'd recommend btrfs and mount with compress,ssd.

btrfs will eat your SSD very quickly. It write data constantly even in an idle system.

This is just not true. Modern SSDs have WEAR LEVELING :!: . This means you can write to them constantly 24/7 for many YEARS before they will fail. Most SSDs now have longer MTBFs than traditional hard disks.
_________________
2.6.34-rc3 on x86_64 w/ paludis
WM: ratpoison
Term: urxvt, zsh
Browser: uzbl
Email: mutt, offlineimap
IRC: weechat
News: newsbeuter
PDF: apvlv
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ial
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 27 Dec 2008
Posts: 161
Location: Warsaw (Warszawa)

PostPosted: Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Need4Speed wrote:
Modern SSDs ... you can write to them constantly 24/7 for many YEARS before they will fail. Most SSDs now have longer MTBFs than traditional hard disks.
but does it apply to MLC either?
does "most" mean "the most espensive ones" maybe?

However please, address the issue of suitability particular filesystems to SSDs. Is the true all advanced fs have advantages that are only visible on HDD, i.e. purely aimed to ease traditonal HHD spinning plates limitations (access/seek time) and now it is pointless to use them on SSD?
d2_racing wrote:
Ext2, in fact, you don't need to log the change.
So maybe you shold read this please: "Journaled filesystems will definitely exercise the wear leveling firmware, but so will ext2. The metadata and file data blocks are in a fixed location and use small block sizes. So, metadata heavy workloads will hammer on the SSD either way."
So would minix be the best for SSD indeed?

And also, what about NILFS? "NILFS: A File System to Make SSDs Scream" ;)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Need4Speed
Guru
Guru


Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 497

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just switched over to NILFS2 for my rootfs and fixed the partition alignment to 512k. It has a made HUGE difference in write speeds! 8O
Random writes used to be glacial and would sometimes cause my system to hang for 10-30 seconds if a fsync were forced.

I am using a "Gen 1" Ridata SSD, so NILFS2 is probably helping me more than if you owned something like Intel's X25-m, which has "better" firmware that tries to hide the some of the SSD's characteristics from the filesystem. But I would still give NILFS2 a try if you want faster writes.

SSD Alignment Info:
http://thunk.org/tytso/blog/2009/02/20/aligning-filesystems-to-an-ssds-erase-block-size/
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=373226&postcount=98
_________________
2.6.34-rc3 on x86_64 w/ paludis
WM: ratpoison
Term: urxvt, zsh
Browser: uzbl
Email: mutt, offlineimap
IRC: weechat
News: newsbeuter
PDF: apvlv
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2048
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reiser4 is always the right answer - because of moving journal, compression, it is fast...
_________________
Study finds stunning lack of racial, gender, and economic diversity among middle-class white males

I identify as a dirty penismensch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grubshka
n00b
n00b


Joined: 07 Nov 2004
Posts: 37
Location: Toulouse - France

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 9:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Need4Speed wrote:
I just switched over to NILFS2 for my rootfs and fixed the partition alignment to 512k. It has a made HUGE difference in write speeds! 8O
Random writes used to be glacial and would sometimes cause my system to hang for 10-30 seconds if a fsync were forced.

I am using a "Gen 1" Ridata SSD, so NILFS2 is probably helping me more than if you owned something like Intel's X25-m, which has "better" firmware that tries to hide the some of the SSD's characteristics from the filesystem. But I would still give NILFS2 a try if you want faster writes.

SSD Alignment Info:
http://thunk.org/tytso/blog/2009/02/20/aligning-filesystems-to-an-ssds-erase-block-size/
http://www.ocztechnologyforum.com/forum/showpost.php?p=373226&postcount=98


I read that NILFS was making a lot of disk operations, which was bad for SSD longevity? Is this true?
(This may depend of people means with "longevity" : I don't expect to use my laptop more than 10 years).


I go every days on the webstore, I think I'll click on "buy one day, when I'll decide which one to buy...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2048
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Wed Aug 12, 2009 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://blogs.gentoo.org/nightmorph/2009/08/09/ssds-and-filesystems-part-2

ext4 is crap.
_________________
Study finds stunning lack of racial, gender, and economic diversity among middle-class white males

I identify as a dirty penismensch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wildhorse
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 16 Mar 2006
Posts: 150
Location: Estados Unidos De América

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 5:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Patriot Memory is backing its new Torqx M28 Series SSDs with a 10-year warranty. Is there any IDE (PATA/SATA) HDD available with anything close to a 10-year warranty?

About the pagefile, I say no pagefile is the best pagefile. Go for RAM.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
energyman76b
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 26 Mar 2003
Posts: 2048
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

you need a 'pagefile' to be able to overcommit. Which you need if you really want to make use of your ram. It doesn't have to be big. Just be there.
_________________
Study finds stunning lack of racial, gender, and economic diversity among middle-class white males

I identify as a dirty penismensch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bassai
n00b
n00b


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 9
Location: Munich, Bavaria

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm running ext4 on a SSD. This works fine for 3 months now.
I mounted /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs to compile in RAM.
Furthermore I increased my sync interval.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pdw_hu
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Posts: 200
Location: Budapest, Hungary

PostPosted: Thu Aug 13, 2009 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bassai wrote:
I'm running ext4 on a SSD. This works fine for 3 months now.
I mounted /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs to compile in RAM.
Furthermore I increased my sync interval.


Same here, and am using data=writeback. For some reason s2ram doesn't work (journal problems), but as i don't really need it i haven't dug myself into that issue.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
runem
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Thu May 13, 2010 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

pdw_hu wrote:
bassai wrote:
I'm running ext4 on a SSD. This works fine for 3 months now.
I mounted /var/tmp/portage on tmpfs to compile in RAM.
Furthermore I increased my sync interval.


Same here, and am using data=writeback. For some reason s2ram doesn't work (journal problems), but as i don't really need it i haven't dug myself into that issue.


Acording to http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/49687/ data=writeback and TRIM do not mix well, so I have changed to data=ordered. Using deadline io-sched wtth fifo_batch=1 seems to work well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tnt
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 27 Feb 2004
Posts: 1227

PostPosted: Thu May 13, 2010 10:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

runem wrote:
Using deadline io-sched wtth fifo_batch=1 seems to work well.


have you noticed any performance difference over default fifo_batch=16 ?

I've read somewhere that recent kernels have some ssd-related optimizations for cfs, but unfortunately I've forgot where.
can anyone confirm that?
_________________
gentoo user
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
runem
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Sep 2006
Posts: 40

PostPosted: Fri May 14, 2010 9:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tnt wrote:

have you noticed any performance difference over default fifo_batch=16 ?

I've read somewhere that recent kernels have some ssd-related optimizations for cfs, but unfortunately I've forgot where.
can anyone confirm that?


I have just made at test with tiobench and the default of 16 was slightly better :o

If /sys/block/<device>/queue/rotational is set to 0 then the scheduler works better with SSDs and USB-sticks for that matter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Kernel & Hardware All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum