4 ms·

> ext4 has an alarming number of corruption bugs Which bugs are these? > though I take Linus' description of how the OSX filesystem works with a grain of salt

• justizin 12y ago
  "Which bugs are these?" My favorite is, at least a couple years back, if you had a KVM guest with an ext4 filesystem in an image file, on an ext4 filesystem, the guest OS could corrupt the host OS. #winning Obviously, ext4 is largely a very good FS, but at least twenty people I've managed hundreds of servers with agree that if you do not need huge filesystems, huge files, or directories with tons of files, ext3 is a safer choice. I'm not saying Linus is incompetent, just that his criticism of other filesystems shouldn't be processed as if his work has no faults. One thing I wonder is, is it the filesystem, or the C library, that determines things like how unicode is interpreted in paths - his overwhelming rant focus.
  • phaemon 12y ago
    > at least a couple years back, if you had a KVM guest with an ext4 filesystem in an image file, on an ext4 filesystem, the guest OS could corrupt the host OS. Your "alarming number of corruption bugs" is one bug from a couple of years back? ext4 is fairly well established now. A few years ago it might have been new enough that there were edge cases that needed investigation, but it's robust enough now. And there's a difference between a decent design having some bugs that can be fixed and a fundamentally broken design. Linus seems to be arguing that HFS+ is the latter. The problem with HFS+ is precisely that it needs to handle unicode in the filesystem because it needs to consider different names as the same. And, seemingly, it does it even worse than NFTS does.