Oveflow Ext4 with 64 Bit and Metadata Checksums enabled?

Operating Systems & Open Source Linux
1

Hi

Would you do me a favour, or have a look at it? There is now since Mint 19 / Ubuntu 18.04 a new e2fsprogs: e2fsprogs_1.43.8-1ubuntu1_amd64. Now formatting with mkfs.ext is different. Now Ext4 is 64 Bits and has a Journal created of 1024M in doing mkfs. It seems an old Bug is fixed, where the journal was partly false (e2fsprogs_1.43.4-2).

Now, coming from Btrfs - where it sucked when installing snapper and making Snapshots, I can’t tell whether Ext4 is now ready to use in 64 Bit with Metadata Checksum enabled without having a ‘Journal is full’ Error. I mean they could make a great deal of it, but you didn’t even hear of, that Metadata Checksums are only available when running it in 64-Bit. It is too new to trust.

Can someone overflow it and see what happens? This is now a competition between XFS (using B-Trees extensively is now said) and Ext4 to Btrfs - which is garbage but sounds good.

Better stay with Ext4 in standard option. But nowbody knows if this is 64 bits or not. I use now XFS for backups, but a can’t change all my stuff back, especially if I don know what is now a really working feature? I even have now HFS+ running, because I know it sucks and I have to be careful. New feature no advertisement means asking some pros or don’t touch it. I went back from Btrfs copying for hours. What is to use now? ZDF on Linux makes you loose pools when changing to Debian or using Debian 8.

Please someone oveflow Ext4 with 64 Bit and Metadata Checksums enabled? Thanks.

2

When I first tried XFS on advice switching to linux. They forgot to mention that several steam games would not work at all. This was early days for me but a pain in the ass.

3

What is cool about XFS is that instead of physically moving the data on the disk, such as EXT3 or NTFS and causing frags, it just changes the root-base of the file so it stays in its notated block, just the placement descriptor changes.

EXT4 now uses this feature (which used to be the selling point of XFS). So… It really doesn’t matter either way unless you wnat the advanced journaling in XFS. I use both.

4

Ext. 4 with several file extensions for extraneous use.
Why Ext. 4?
Tried and true.

That will be all.
Carry on.

5

What do you mean by overflow? Fill to capacity?

Why don’t you create an ext4 filesystem in a loopback device and test it yourself? You can use a sparse backing file to avoid having to allocate excess physical space (like thin provisioning) - assuming your underlying filesystem supports sparse files.

Of course, if you do intend to fill the filesystem you’ll need enough capacity to hold the entire filesystem.