[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <F4A59BB4-367A-4F65-AC38-299ADCAF19FB@dilger.ca>
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 22:51:22 -0700
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To: linux_ext4@...inbox.com
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: convert from ext3 versus fresh format
On 2010-11-28, at 14:16, linux_ext4@...inbox.com wrote:
> I have a production system installed on an SSD, whose installer formats
> the target drive as ext3 automatically. I've since learned that ext4 is
> more suited for use on SSDs and am considering an upgrade to ext4.
>
> I see the procedure on how to convert from ext3 to ext4 on the wiki, and
> before I proceed would like to know whether there's an advantage to
> formatting as ext4 from the start as opposed to converting after an ext3
> format.
It is possible to use the ext4 filesystem code on ext3-formatted filesystems without any conversion being done. Enabling extents will improve performance, and uninit_bg will improve e2fsck performance.
You wouldn't be able to take advantage of flex_bg without reformatting (or some significant surgery to resize2fs).
If the inodes are "large" (256 bytes) then mounting the filesystem with ext4 will allow the inodes to use nanosecond timestamps.
> In the case that there is a difference, what exactly is sacrificed in
> choosing one over the other?
Reformatting and reinstalling and/or restoring from backup into an ext4-formatted filesystem will allow using a few of the features lay out the files with extents, and reduce the metadata overhead. There will be some performance benefits, but I don't think it will necessarily be dramatic.
Cheers, Andreas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists