On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 02:32:58PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > If we want to improve fsck time then the best thing to do would be
> > to consider a different default value for the -i option of mke2fs.
This advice is not applicable for ext4, since it will not read unused
portions of the inode table. There have been a number of improvements
in the ext4 file system format which means that in general fsck times
for ext4 are around 7-12 times faster than the equivalent ext3 file
system.
> > As an aside "mke2fs -t ext4" includes huge_file, dir_nlink, and
> > extra_isize while mke4fs doesn't. This difference seems wrong to
> > me.
>
> Urgs. +1.
I've never heard of "mke4fs" --- who thought up that abortion?
"mke2fs -t ext4" and "mkfs.ext4" will both do the right thing, as far
as creating file systems that have the correct ext4 file system
features for a file system designed to be mounted using the ext4 file
system driver in modern Linux kernels.
- Ted
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20111227211736.ga10...@thunk.org
