gjournal panic 7.0-RC1

[Michael Butler]

Chris wrote:

> If the only advantage of journaling is to avoid slow fsck's then I may
> decide I can live without it, the real attraction to me was been able
> to use the much glamorised async which is what made me so shocked when
> write speeds were low.

If I understood this thread correctly, the impression of poor 
performance is based on a configuration where both the journal and the 
data are on the same physical drive. Intuitively, this will likely 
penalize any transaction on the volume, read or write, since you're 
asking the drive to not only accumulate a queue of information to the 
journal in one region of the disk but also to flush that data in "idle 
time" to a region in the data space on that same disk at a significant 
seek-length away.

I would think that journaling on one drive and storing the resultant 
data-set on another would improve performance enormously (reduced 
seek-lengths) and more so if they were 1) high-rpm drives (less 
rotational latency) and 2) on different buses (no bus/controller 
contention),

	Michael