Posted Oct 12, 2012 8:21 UTC (Fri) by cmccabe (guest, #60281)
Parent article: An f2fs teardown
I'm a little disturbed by the many arbitrary low limits in the filesystem. 16 TB max? Less than 4 TB max for a file? Timestamps only up to 2038?
I mean, sure, good design requires tradeoffs. But I thought the point of this filesystem was that it would become some kind of long-lived standard for how we accessed embedded flash devices, sort of like how FAT32 is now. We would probably not even be talking about replacing FAT32 on flash devices, despite its many inefficiencies and limitations, if it didn't have the 2TB limit.
Or am I misreading this, and it's simply about avoiding the FAT tax and getting some additional performance in the bargain?