Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - [SM-Discuss] SquashFS resource usage (was: Compressed grimoires)

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com>
  • To: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com>
  • Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: [SM-Discuss] SquashFS resource usage (was: Compressed grimoires)
  • Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2012 07:53:26 -0200

On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 05:09:47 -0200
Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com> wrote:
> It would be interesting to try compressed grimoires. I.e. instead
> of distributing tarballs, lets distribute SquashFS images (or
> something similar).
>
> I've tested it and the results were kinda conclusive:
> # du /var/lib/sorcery/codex/test test.img
> 179M /var/lib/sorcery/codex/test
> 11M test.img
>
> Opinions?

For those not wanting this behaviour, it's possible to decompress a
squashfs, much like a tarball.

The filesystem overhead is minimal, barely noticeable even on very
constrained systems. I've tried it on a Linksys WRT54GL 1.1 (16MB of
RAM), in tandem with NFS and JFFS2, running several daemons (irc proxy,
openvpn, httpd, olsrd, radvd, dnsmasq, etc.).

The module itself uses <40KB of RAM, and a internal cache. This cache
is used for: 8 meta-data entries (8KB each), 1 read_page block, and 3
fragment (i.e packed tails) blocks (by default, can be changed via
Kconfig).

The default block size is 128KB, so it would be a usage of 4 * 128KB +
8 * 8KB = 576KB per filesystem.

Plus the 40KB of code shared by them all.

I think it's reasonable for most systems...

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page