Last active
May 27, 2023 22:21
-
-
Save mailinglists35/36980457edc70ff6d6f2bdf1e62b1eff to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
when to choose EXT4 over XFS - ext4 is still king for home use or older systems
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| https://access.redhat.com/articles/3129891#choosing-a-local-file-system-6 | |
| Another way to characterize this is that the Ext4 file system variants tend to perform better on systems that have limited I/O capability. Ext3 and Ext4 perform better on limited bandwidth (< 200MB/s) and up to ~1,000 IOPS capability. For anything with higher capability, XFS tends to be faster. XFS also consumes about twice the CPU-per-metadata operation compared to Ext3 and Ext4, so if you have a CPU-bound workload with little concurrency, then the Ext3 or Ext4 variants will be faster. In general, Ext3 or Ext4 is better if an application uses a single read/write thread and small files, while XFS shines when an application uses multiple read/write threads and bigger files. | |
| https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/9/html/managing_file_systems/overview-of-available-file-systems_managing-file-systems | |
| ext4 is better when: | |
| Single-threaded I/O | |
| Limited I/O capability (under 1000 IOPS) | |
| Limited bandwidth (under 200MB/s) | |
| CPU-bound workload | |
| Support for offline shrinking |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment