Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 14th May 2010 22:23 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 424617
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Comment by bsharitt
by Laurence on Sat 15th May 2010 13:02
in reply to "RE: Comment by bsharitt"
According to http://lists.meego.com/pipermail/meego-dev/2010-May/002183.html btrfs already works better than Ext3
That's nice, but what about the current standard: Ext4?
RE[3]: Comment by bsharitt
by ggeldenhuys on Sat 15th May 2010 15:20
in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by bsharitt"
That's nice, but what about the current standard: Ext4?
I read the other day a very nice comparison between Ext3, Ext4, XFS and Btrfs. Ext3 outperformed Ext4 by far. Btrfs surprised everybody by even outperforming Ext3 on most tests (though not all tests).
I'll try and find that review and post a link. But it's not the only review I have found with come to similar conclusions. Btrfs is quite usable already and the built-in compression made the filesystem perform even better (with todays fast hardware).





Member since:
2010-02-16
According to http://lists.meego.com/pipermail/meego-dev/2010-May/002183.html btrfs already works better than Ext3