<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Data Matters - A blog about flash memory &#187; file system performance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.datalight.com/tag/file-system-performance/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.datalight.com</link>
	<description>Datalight's blog on flash memory, device data storage, data reliability and the embedded industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:25:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Next Generation File System for Windows</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/next-generation-file-system-for-windows</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/next-generation-file-system-for-windows#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2012 20:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Thom Denholm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Reliability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reliance Nitro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/?p=542</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There&#8217;s a lot of buzz on the MSDN blog site regarding their latest file system post. http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/16/building-the-next-generation-file-system-for-windows-refs.aspx - and plenty of insightful comments as well. I for one am happy to see people talking about file system features, especially Data Integrity, knowledge of Flash Media, and faster access through B+ trees. Of course, Datalight&#8217;s own Reliance Nitro [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a lot of buzz on the MSDN blog site regarding their latest file system post. <a title="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/16/building-the-next-generation-file-system-for-windows-refs.aspx" href="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/16/building-the-next-generation-file-system-for-windows-refs.aspx" target="_blank">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/01/16/building-the-next-generation-file-system-for-windows-refs.aspx</a> - and plenty of insightful comments as well.</p>
<p>I for one am happy to see people talking about file system features, especially Data Integrity, knowledge of Flash Media, and faster access through B+ trees. Of course, Datalight&#8217;s own Reliance Nitro file system has had all this and more for some time now&#8230;</p>
<p>Microsoft has a new term for a thing we&#8217;ve seen often in the case of unexpected power loss &#8211; a &#8220;Torn Write&#8221;. They point this out as a specific problem for their journalling file system, NTFS, but updating any file system metadata in place can be problematic. It looks to me like this new file system, ReFS, handles this by bundling the metadata writes with other metadata writes or with the file data. If the former, this demonstrates the trade-off between Reliability and Performance that we are very familiar with at Datalight. Bundling smaller writes will help with spinning media and flash. In time we will see how much control the application developer has over this configuration &#8211; another important point for our customers.</p>
<p>One of the commenters posted that error correction belongs at the block device layer, and I tend to agree. Microsoft&#8217;s design goal &#8220;to detect and correct corruption&#8221; is a noble one, but how would they detect corruption for user data? Additional file checksums and ECC algorithms would be intrusive and potentially time consuming. Keeping a watch on vital file system structures is important, of course, and a good backup in case block level error detection fails.</p>
<p>I look forward to reading more from Microsoft&#8217;s file system team in the future, and especially hope to see a roadmap for when these important changes will make it down to the embedded space.</p>
<h3 class="cta">Learn more about <a href="http://blog.datalight.com/transactional-file-system-explained">what happens during a power interruption.</a></h3>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/next-generation-file-system-for-windows/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Datalight Outperforms Other Linux Flash File Systems</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/datalight-outperforms-other-linux-flash-file-systems</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/datalight-outperforms-other-linux-flash-file-systems#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Jul 2011 15:09:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michele Pike</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Flash File System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Memory Manager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flash memory performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[linu]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[linux]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/?p=457</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It’s always gratifying when you run benchmarks and discover your product actually does outperform the competition. Months and months of development effort went in to making Reliance Nitro and FlashFX Tera run flawlessly in an open source environment. We were pretty sure our transactional architecture beat the pants off YAFFS2, JFFS2, and UBIFS, but until [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It’s always gratifying when you run benchmarks and discover your product actually does outperform the competition. Months and months of development effort went in to making Reliance Nitro and FlashFX Tera run flawlessly in an open source environment. We were pretty sure our transactional architecture beat the pants off YAFFS2, JFFS2, and UBIFS, but until you run the final benchmarks, you really don’t know for certain. Recently we ran tests on two platforms, a ConnectCore Wi-i.MX51 (Cortex-A8) and an NVidia Tegra 2 (Cortex ARM9). The Flash part used for all tests was a Samsung 512 MB part. The specific test used was IOZone, with a specified file size sufficient to be larger than the Linux cache, in order to better reflect the raw throughput. The results speak for themselves:<br />
<img class="alignnone" title="Linux Reads Competition" src="http://www.datalight.com/assets/images/Linux-Read-Comps.jpg " alt="" width="600" height="329" /></p>
<p><img class="alignnone" title="Linux Writes Competition" src="http://www.datalight.com/assets/images/Linux-Write-Comps.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="319" /></p>
<h3 class="cta"><a title="linux jffs2" href="http://blog.datalight.com/jffs2-linux-flash-file-system">Also see an article weighing the pros and cons of JFFS2</a></h3>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/datalight-outperforms-other-linux-flash-file-systems/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>About Fragmentation</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/about-fragmentation</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/about-fragmentation#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2011 16:33:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Thom Denholm</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Product Benefit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[File system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reliance Nitro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/?p=368</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Do you need defrag? It mostly depends on your hardware and your use case. While defragmenting a file system can make the computer run faster, it&#8217;s not the only answer. Fragmentation is usually caused when modifying a file. Overwriting the file or making it larger means storing a fragment of the file in a new [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Do you need defrag? It mostly depends on your hardware and your use case. While defragmenting a file system can make the computer run faster, it&#8217;s not the only answer.</p>
<p>Fragmentation is usually caused when modifying a file. Overwriting the file or making it larger means storing a fragment of the file in a new place, unless the file system creates a complete new copy of the file. Databases are particularly susceptible here – they are usually large files and often updated in the middle.</p>
<p>Another way fragmentation happens is when the file system initially stores the file in pieces. This could happen if the file system is not configured to keep file blocks together, or if the media is fairly full and there are no spaces of sufficient size for the new file.</p>
<p>What about the impact of fragmentation? In the days of rotating media, a fragmented file meant extra head movement and platter rotation to read the file. With flash media, the extra overhead is just additional block reads – a far smaller cost.</p>
<p>Avoiding fragmentation if you&#8217;re using Reliance Nitro can be as simple as customizing your transaction points. Instead of transacting on a timed basis, create a new transaction point only when the entire file is on the media, at &#8220;file close&#8221;. Similar settings may be available on other file systems.</p>
<p>If your use case causes fragmentation, a valid workaround might be to reformat the media after backing up the database files. A fresh file format is fairly quick on modern hardware, and can be coupled with a bad block test as well.</p>
<h3 class="cta"><a title="Reliance Nitro" href="http://www.datalight.com/products/filesystems/reliance-nitro">Read more about Reliance Nitro</a></h3>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/about-fragmentation/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Press Release: Latest Datalight Flash File System Brings 20 Millisecond Mount Times to Linux through Kernel Versions 2.6.33</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/20-millisecond-mount-times-to-linux</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/20-millisecond-mount-times-to-linux#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 17:02:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michele Pike</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Flash File System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Memory Manager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flash file system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[linux]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[performance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/?p=312</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bothell, WA, – May 5, 2010 – Today Datalight announced support for Linux kernel versions up to 2.6.33, the most recently released Linux versions available. FlashFX Tera, the file-system independent flash memory manager and Reliance Nitro, the highly-reliable, high-performance file system offer much faster mount times than UBIFS, YAFFS, or JFFS2. In addition, the Datalight [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Bothell, WA, – May 5, 2010</strong> – Today Datalight announced support for Linux kernel versions up to 2.6.33, the most recently released Linux versions available. FlashFX Tera, the file-system independent flash memory manager and Reliance Nitro, the highly-reliable, high-performance file system offer much faster mount times than UBIFS, YAFFS, or JFFS2. In addition, the Datalight products boost write speed over the standard file systems and provide out-of-the-box support for over 300 different flash memory parts from all the leading suppliers. Linux is finding its way into more devices such as smart phones, automotive infotainment, and industrial equipment which require both responsiveness and 100% data reliability.</p>
<p>“With the growth in adoption of Linux for data-intensive embedded devices, OEMs need a flash file system that better supports their reliability and performance requirements.” said Roy Sherrill, Datalight CEO. “By supporting the most recent kernel versions of Linux we’re filling that gap in the market with a robust, commercial-grade solution backed by our reputation for responsive, high-quality support.”</p>
<p>FlashFX Tera supports the full range of flash technologies including NAND, NOR, and MLC NAND flash in a single driver. Its patented wear-leveling and bad block management extend the useful life of devices using flash. While FlashFX Tera can be used with virtually any file system, pairing it with Reliance Nitro provides an optimized data storage software stack to simplify system development.</p>
<p>FlashFX Tera 1.2 and Reliance Nitro 1.2 are available immediately from Datalight and the Datalight worldwide network of channel partners. Please visit us at <a href="http://www.datalight.com/partners/worldwide-sales-partners">http://www.datalight.com/partners/worldwide-sales-partners</a> to find a reseller near you.</p>
<p>The Reliance family of <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/reliance/">file system</a>s and FlashFX family of <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/flashfx/">flash media manager</a>s comprise the Datalight <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/"><strong>flash file system</strong></a> solution. Reliance was designed from the ground up for <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/reliance/">high reliability</a> applications. Dynamic Transaction Point™ technology gives developers full control over performance and data protection characteristics, protecting users from file system corruption, even after unexpected system interruption. Embedded applications can benefit from faster boot times that remain consistent for the life of the product, regardless of disk size. FlashFX™ Tera features pre-written support for over 300 flash parts, works with virtually any NAND controller, and features <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/flashfx/">wear leveling</a>, <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/flashfx/">bad block management</a>, and background compaction for unrivaled performance.</p>
<p>For information, contact:<br />
Kerri McConnell, Director of Marketing<br />
425.686.1069<br />
<a href="mailto:kerri.mcconnell@datalight.com">kerri.mcconnell@datalight.com</a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/20-millisecond-mount-times-to-linux/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reliance Nitro Makes an Impact</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-nitro-makes-an-impact</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-nitro-makes-an-impact#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:55:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michele Pike</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Datalight Products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flash file system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reliance Nitro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-nitro-makes-an-impact</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last week one of our customers sent the following evaluation report in an email to Datalight support staff: “Right now we are in the process of testing the impact of Reliance Nitro in our application. Apparently, we noticed some boost in the performance:  faster write speed, significant speed increase of transaction point creation, faster read [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last week one of our customers sent the following evaluation report in an email to Datalight support staff:</p>
<p>“<em>Right now we are in the process of testing the impact of Reliance Nitro in our application. Apparently, we noticed some boost in the performance:  faster write speed, significant speed increase of transaction point creation, faster read speed, and significantly faster directory read (we typically have 1000 files in the directory). So, in conclusion, the overall performance of the system is boosted quite significantly</em>.”</p>
<p>Another real world example of how Reliance Nitro boosts performance in directories with a large number of files. To learn how Reliance Nitro does it, check out the <a href="http://www.datalight.com/resources/achieving-breakthrough-performance-with-tree-based-file-systems-14-may-2009" target="_blank">whitepaper</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-nitro-makes-an-impact/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reliance and Reliance Nitro</title>
		<link>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-and-reliance-nitro</link>
		<comments>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-and-reliance-nitro#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:26:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michele Pike</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Datalight Products]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash File System]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Flash Memory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[File system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[file system performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flash file system]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[flash memory performance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reliability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reliance Nitro]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-and-reliance-nitro</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ever since we announced our high performance file system Reliance Nitro, we have been getting questions on how it compares to the original Reliance file system. Below is a quick-reference table noting some of the differences between the two. For a more detailed comparison (including performance benchmarks), please contact us. Attributes Reliance Reliance Nitro Recommendation [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ever since we announced our <a href="http://www.datalight.com/products/reliancenitro/">high performance file system</a> Reliance Nitro, we have been getting questions on how it compares to the original Reliance file system. Below is a quick-reference table noting some of the differences between the two. For a more detailed comparison (including performance benchmarks), please <a href="http://www.datalight.com/about/contact-us">contact us</a>.</p>
<table width="498" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="102"><strong>Attributes</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="78"><strong>Reliance</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="78"><strong>Reliance Nitro</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="238"><strong>Recommendation</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="102">High performance on large number of files  (100+)</td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="237">If your device stores a large number of files in a single directory, Nitro will perform much faster than Reliance.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="103">High performance on large files</td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="236">Nitro’s extent based design allows it to perform faster on larger files. For sake of this comparison, files can be considered large if they are 10+ times the block size of the device</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="104">Frequent transaction points</td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="236">Nitro introduces a new structure called Delta transactions which speed up the time taken to conduct transaction points. Depending on how often you conduct transactions points, Nitro can provide significant advantage</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="104">Random I/O performance most critical</td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td valign="top" width="236">Reliance’s block based design provides an advantage on random I/O on small files. On large files both Reliance and Nitro perform equally well on this metric</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="104">Sequential I/O  performance most critical</td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td width="236">Nitro outperforms Reliance on sequential I/O due to its extent based design</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="104">Support for Windows Mobile</td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td width="236">FlashFX Pro 4.0 for Windows Mobile enables a new discard interface that allows Nitro to have much faster write speeds on flash memory</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="104">File-size limit</td>
<td width="79">32-bit</td>
<td width="79">64-bit</td>
<td width="236">Nitro uses 64-bit variables for file size limits allowing for very large file sizes.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="104">Read-only version</td>
<td width="79"><strong>√</strong></td>
<td width="79"></td>
<td width="236">Reliance currently provides a read-only version called Reliance Reader. Nitro currently does not provide a reader application – this is scheduled for v2</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.datalight.com/reliance-and-reliance-nitro/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

