FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-30-2009, 05:08 AM
Raphael
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are also slower.*
Regards,Raphael

New Email names for you!

Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.

Hurry before someone else does!--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 05:42 AM
Christopher Chan
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

Raphael wrote:
>
>
> Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the
> performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was
> around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are
> also slower.
jfs! jfs! jfs!

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 06:38 AM
Raphael
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

But isn't the default filesystem for ubuntu ext4, and isn't it the default for a reason?

Sent from my iPod

On 30-Oct-2009, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Chan <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:

Raphael wrote:


Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the
performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was
around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are
also slower.
jfs! jfs! jfs!

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users



Get your preferred Email name!
Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com
http://mail.promotions.yahoo.com/newdomains/sg/

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 06:38 AM
Raphael
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

But isn't the default filesystem for ubuntu ext4, and isn't it the default for a reason?

Sent from my iPod

On 30-Oct-2009, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Chan <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:

Raphael wrote:


Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the
performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was
around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are
also slower.
jfs! jfs! jfs!

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users



Get your preferred Email name!
Now you can @ymail.com and @rocketmail.com
http://mail.promotions.yahoo.com/newdomains/sg/

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 09:30 AM
Chan Chung Hang Christopher
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

Raphael wrote:
> But isn't the default filesystem for ubuntu ext4, and isn't it the default for a reason?
>

/me rotfl. On RHEL/Centos, ext3 is the only filesystem available. Not
sure if they will offer ext3 + ext4 with RHEL6. Why?

ext4 is an unproven filesystem. Data loss anyone? Not like ext3 and jfs.
XFS codebase is so blooming big, I am not sure that it will ever reach
the state that ext3 and jfs currently are.

> Sent from my iPod
>
> On 30-Oct-2009, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Chan <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>
> Raphael wrote:
>
>
> Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the
> performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was
> around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are
> also slower.
> jfs! jfs! jfs!
>
>


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 09:58 AM
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

>Data loss anyone?<What evidence do you have that there would be data loss? ext2 and ext3 were used almost immediately after their release as well. The distro maintainers usually do some basic reliability tests or at least have access to such tests. So I would be happy to read any tests you've seen that suggest ext4 is unreliable. To start scaring people with talk of data loss based on random speculation would not be good.



Regards,



John






-----Original Message-----

From: Chan Chung Hang Christopher <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk>

To: ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Sent: Fri, Oct 30, 2009 11:30 am

Subject: Re: Slower performance with ext4











Raphael wrote:

> But isn't the default filesystem for ubuntu ext4, and isn't it the default for

a reason?

>



/me rotfl. On RHEL/Centos, ext3 is the only filesystem available. Not

sure if they will offer ext3 + ext4 with RHEL6. Why?



ext4 is an unproven filesystem. Not like ext3 and jfs.

XFS codebase is so blooming big, I am not sure that it will ever reach

the state that ext3 and jfs currently are.



> Sent from my iPod

>

> On 30-Oct-2009, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Chan <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk>

wrote:

>

> Raphael wrote:

>

>

> Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the

> performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was

> around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are

> also slower.

> jfs! jfs! jfs!

>

>





--

ubuntu-users mailing list

ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com

Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users






--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 10:38 AM
Steve Flynn
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

On Fri, Oct 30, 2009 at 10:58 AM, <fyrbrds@netscape.net> wrote:
> >Data loss anyone?<
>
> What evidence do you have that there would be data loss? ext2 and ext3 were
> used almost immediately after their release as well. The distro maintainers
> usually do some basic reliability tests or at least have access to such
> tests. So I would be happy to read any tests you've seen that suggest ext4
> is unreliable. To start scaring people with talk of data loss based on
> random speculation would not be good.

It's not random specualtion:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=ext4+dataloss+reports&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GBfficial&client=firefox-a

--
Steve
When one person suffers from a delusion it is insanity. When many
people suffer from a delusion it is called religion.

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 10:52 AM
Avi Greenbury
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

fyrbrds@netscape.net wrote:
> >Data loss anyone?<
> What evidence do you have that there would be data loss?

It's a brand-spanking-new filesystem. Fear of data loss is natural and
understandable.



--
Avi Greenbury
http://aviswebsite.co.uk
http://aviswebsite.co.uk/asking-questions

--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 11:05 AM
"Karl F. Larsen"
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

Raphael wrote:
>
> Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition,

the performance was significantly slower compared to ext3.

Startup was around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs
application

speeds are also slower.


If you can document this in a bug report it will help the
designers of ext4 to work on their project to speed it up.
I have been working on my wife's Windows XP and it is sure
lazy coming on. They have an early Microsoft add, and then XP
starts to unfold...

Karl


>
> Regards,
> Raphael
>
>
> New Email names for you!
> Get the Email name you've always wanted on the new @ymail and @rocketmail.
> Hurry before someone else does!
> http://mail.promotions.yahoo.com/newdomains/sg/
>


--

Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
Key ID = 3951B48D


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 
Old 10-30-2009, 11:10 AM
"Karl F. Larsen"
 
Default Slower performance with ext4

Raphael wrote:
> But isn't the default filesystem for ubuntu ext4, and isn't it the default for a reason?
>
> Sent from my iPod
>
> On 30-Oct-2009, at 2:42 PM, Christopher Chan <christopher.chan@bradbury.edu.hk> wrote:
>
> Raphael wrote:
>
>
> Help, after I had clean installed Karmic on my ext4 partition, the
> performance was significantly slower compared to ext3. Startup was
> around 7 secs but with ext4 it's now 20 secs application speeds are
> also slower.
> jfs! jfs! jfs!
>
When I loaded Karmic Beta I had a choice to use ext3 or ext4.
Grub 2 will run on either file system. This tells me I made a
bad choice going with ext4, but I thought it was fixed by now.

Karl


--

Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
Linux User
#450462 http://counter.li.org.
Key ID = 3951B48D


--
ubuntu-users mailing list
ubuntu-users@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-users
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 02:45 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org