Comments on: New ext4 vs XFS benchmarks using Fedora 11 Leonidas

By: Abbas Ahmed

Abbas Ahmed — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:51:31 +0000

Hi,

I wonder what would be the performance like in a scenario where we have a multithreaded workload? I think XFS would perform really well, not sure about others though,

By: KRM

KRM — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 04:00:35 +0000

I’ve been using XFS, both at home and in production at work, since 2002 and I have to say that EXT4 will have to really nail home the numbers in order to convince me to change. The maturity, and the market in which it matured (various higher end SGI servers, US military and various others) and the fact that XFS has saved my ass more than once in the past are all compelling reasons to stick with it. I’ll be keeping an eye on EXT4, but it has a ways to go before i would actually make the move.

By: c0

c0 — Sat, 28 Aug 2010 21:20:22 +0000

nice comparison
by today it seems that EXT4 is better than XFS in performance
but personally i prefer XFS because is mature, and uses the maximun space possible.

By: AK

AK — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 02:40:08 +0000

Good article,

I’ll be going with XFS as well. Why take a chance with ext4, when XFS is so fast and mature. The fact that the ext4 team postponed releasing the online defragment utility blows away the incentive to switch.

Plus why take a chance that my production systems might lose data with an unfinished release of ext4. For example ext4 can blank out files that have not been undated from the journal during a power fail or unclean shutdown (instead of leaving the data of old version of the file intact; i.e. PERMANENT DATA LOSS); this is due the way theodore tso implemented delayed allocation and his the EXT journaling algorithm.

By: JD

JD — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:38:08 +0000

Nice read thanks. My mind was between XFS and EXT4, will be going for XFS now.