Originally posted by apaige
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Google To Switch To EXT4, Hires Ted To Code
Collapse
X
-
-
With the Linux 2.6.32 kernel, EXT4 lost much ground while Btrfs gained and before that a single commit severely dampened the FS performance.
...the performance of EXT4 is looking to be even worse with the forthcoming Linux 2.6.33 kernel.
Sometimes I regret switching from ReiserFS.
Comment
-
-
Google's Michael Rubin shared that they chose EXT4 after benchmarking it as well as XFS and JFS (possibly with our Phoronix Test Suite carrying out some of the testing, which they have used in other areas).
Comment
-
ext4 is safe, probably not fast.
That being said, where I used to work they *still* use reiserfs3. JFS & XFS just flat aren't stable, they aren't dependable under hardware failure or conditions of power failure (wall or ups, take your pick). The biggest beef I had in the past with the ext? series is the time to fsck is extremely excessive. reiserfs even with rebuild-tree could be back online dramatically sooner than ext? with 16 drive raid6's.
I haven't run ext4, I'm assuming the time to fsck hasn't improved much.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bnolsen View Postreiserfs even with rebuild-tree could be back online dramatically sooner than ext? with 16 drive raid6's
Comment
-
Originally posted by bnolsen View PostI haven't run ext4, I'm assuming the time to fsck hasn't improved much.
Comment
-
Originally posted by bnolsen View Postext4 is safe, probably not fast....the performance of EXT4 is looking to be even worse with the forthcoming Linux 2.6.33 kernel.Last edited by kraftman; 18 January 2010, 08:56 AM.
Comment
Comment