EXT4 Is Coming
ah admin writes "A series of patches has been proposed in Linux kernel mailing list earlier by a team of engineers from Red Hat, ClusterFS, IBM and Bull to extend the Ext3 filesystem to add support for very large filesystems. After a long-winded discussion, the developers came forward with a plan to roll these changes into a new version — Ext4."
This'll fill the gap between now and when Reiser4 is declared stable - some time after Duke Nukem Forever gets released.
Interesting bit from wiki/ZFS:
LWN had an interesting article on ext4 not long ago.
engineers from Red Hat, ClusterFS, IBM
OK, hands up - who wants to run ClusterFS so that they can say they needed to do a "clusterfsck"?
Reiser4 does this.
Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
Let me put it this way, it's a little past the average slashdot porn collection:
ext3: 8TB total, 4TB files
ext4: 32 zettabyte (1024*1024*1024 TB), 1 exabyte files (1024*1024 TB)
Beyond that, it doesn't seem to actually change much.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Nobody has a fsck that can compare to e2fsck (ext2/ext3/etc.) for quality.
The e2fsck program has a huge test suite that it must pass before a release. A set of corrupted filesystems must be correctly repaired to be bit-for-bit identical to the desired result.
A typical fsck has a good chance of crashing (SIGSEGV, the "segmentation violation") when the going gets tough.
While FreeBSD's UFS developers were messing around with sync writes to avoid testing a fsck that would often crash, the ext2 developers ran full async and wrote a damn fine fsck to put things back in order. Now you can choose from three different levels of journalling, and you still get the ass-kicking fsck program.
There basically is no fsck for XFS, Reiserfs, or Reiser4. JFS doesn't have much AFAIK, and ZFS is a newborn.
What are you going to do when your fancy filesystem gets trashed? I hope you keep excellent backups, very recent and tested to be readable.