EXT4 Lands A Nice Performance Improvement For Appending To Delalloc Files

[phoronix]

Phoronix: EXT4 Lands A Nice Performance Improvement For Appending To Delalloc Files

With the EXT4 file-system updates for Linux 6.6 there is mostly some code clean-ups and other bug fixing. But one change in particular stands out for its performance impact...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.6-EXT4

[Kjell]

Does this benefit XFS?

[Lbibass]

Does this benefit XFS?

it's a performance improvement for EXT4. Where did it mention XFS?

[Kjell]

it's a performance improvement for EXT4. Where did it mention XFS?

It's called wishful thinking

[Malsabku]

Can someone explain me the reason to use EXT4, when XFS is faster and has more features?

[GreenReaper]

Can someone explain me the reason to use EXT4, when XFS is faster and has more features?

Well, as you can see, EXT is on version 4, while XFS is still on version 1 - EXT's got a name you can trust! 😼

[skeevy420]

Well, as you can see, EXT is on version 4, while XFS is still on version 1 - EXT's got a name you can trust! 😼

When I first came here, this was all swamp. Everyone said I was daft to build an extent based file system on a swamp, but I built in all the same, just to show them. It sank into the swamp. So I built a second one. That sank into the swamp. So I built a third. That burned down, fell over, then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you're going to get, Lad, the strongest extent based file system in all of England.

[coder]

Well, as you can see, EXT is on version 4, while XFS is still on version 1 - EXT's got a name you can trust! 😼

This is not a serious post, in case anyone failed to see the sarcasm.

XFS long pre-dates EXT4, with roots as far back as 1993, at SGI.

I cannot provide a justification for using EXT4 over XFS, although there were some operations that EXT4 performed faster, back in the distant past. Not sure if that's still true. Actually, here's a recent comparison:

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-5.14-File-Systems

For whatever reason, I think some distros still default to EXT4. And then, a lot of people still have legacy filesystems that date back to when EXT4 was the de facto standard.

[KyleSanderson]

It's faster for single threaded applications. Once concurrency becomes a factor, ext4 is still faster and uses less load closer to a full fs.

[Snaipersky]

This is not a serious post, in case anyone failed to see the sarcasm.

XFS long pre-dates EXT4, with roots as far back as 1993, at SGI.

I cannot provide a justification for using EXT4 over XFS, although there were some operations that EXT4 performed faster, back in the distant past. Not sure if that's still true. Actually, here's a recent comparison:

https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-5.14-File-Systems

For whatever reason, I think some distros still default to EXT4. And then, a lot of people still have legacy filesystems that date back to when EXT4 was the de facto standard.

Also Steam games will sometimes break on XFS. And after 3 decades XFS cannot shrink.