But not enough users follow the guide on and instead do stuff that actually makes the system worse. However, BTRFS had significantly better performance with small files than EXT4. XFS, EXT4, and BTRFS are file systems commonly used in Linux-based operating systems. It's a 64-bit, journaling filesystem that has been built into the Linux kernel since 2001 and offers high performance for large filesystems and high degrees of concurrency (i. But to be honest, it might be easier for me to work around than the lack of the possibility for single-file clone that btrfs, XFS etc. ext4 or XFS are otherwise good options if you back up your config. Phoronix: Linux 5. A Seagate FireCuda 520 PCIe 4. The stock mount options were used for all of the testing. XFS is spectacularly fast during both the insertion phase and the workload execution. 迄今为止，对于桌面系统而言，ext4 似乎是一个更好的选择，因为它是默认的文件系统，传输文件时也比 btrfs 更快。. While RAID 5 and 6 can be compared to RAID Z. On the other hand, for Linux/Unix-based devices, it might be a bit of a challenge choosing one among many options. 而如果您注重稳定性和广泛的支持，Ext4可能更适合您。. Regardless what I'm doing the maximum transferrate (write) is between 40-60MB on ZFS. with mirrored pairs, you also have the option of. 1. Ext4 focuses on providing a reliable and stable file system with good performance. Btrfs trails the other options for a database in terms of latency and throughput. Each of these file systems has its own way of organizing data, merits, and demerits. ago. 📽️ Abonnez-vous : Devenir membre VIP : et se former à #Linux, voici ce que je vous propose dans cet. Why? Files are the most important bits of data on your hard drive. Btrfs was 107% faster in initial read scores and 24% faster in initial write scores. brown2green. . However benchmarks test quite narrow parameters which may not be reflected by running an OS. Checksumming, along with copy-on-write, provides the key method of ensuring file system integrity after unexpected power loss. Btrfs stands for B Tree Filesystem, It is often pronounced as “better-FS” or “butter-FS. Maybe adding Btrfs compression would be negligible outside of storage benchmarks. That XFS performs best on fast storage and better hardware allowing more parallelism was my conclusion too. Server with complex storage needs including redundancy and you need high uptime, and you have the budget. 2. xfs with ftype=1, ext4: fuse-overlayfs: any filesystem: devicemapper: direct-lvm: btrfs: btrfs: zfs: zfs: vfs: any filesystem: Other. Main features: Data protection features, including snapshot, replication, and point-in-time recovery. Ext4 is the default filesystem in Manjaro at the moment. Generally, would go with btrfs. We recommend btrfs for testing, development, and any non-critical deployments. There won't be any noticeable difference. ZFS brings robustness and stability, while it avoids the corruption of large files. If you are running a more stable system like Dabian based Linux EXT4 is a better choice because it's faster file system but not as easy to revert. Business, Economics, and Finance. XFS and ext4 aren't that different. 11. Or btrfs, which is making some serious headway again with it becoming the default filesystem for Fedora. 1 million iops for ext4, right in line with the spec of the drive times 2,. OMV4 or OMV5. Also BRTFS compresses the file system using less space compared to EXT4 but again the tradeoff is it uses more computer. It does its job well. Btrfs removes duplicate data from disk directly while Ext4 cannot do that, Btrfs support CoW so users can create writable and read-only. 0 Intel Skylake 16384MB Samsung SSD 950 PRO 256GB LLVMpipe Realtek ALC1150 Intel Connection Ubuntu 16. In the time since I chose ext4 for these systems, btrfs seems to have come a long way, so the choice may be harder today. Ext4文件系统是Ext3的继承者，是Linux下的主流文件系统。经过多年的发展，它是目前最稳定的文件系统之一。但是，老实说，与其他Linux文件系统相比，它并不是最好的Linux文件系统。 在XFS vs Ext4方面，XFS在以下几个方面优于Ext4： I've seen benchmarks (eg: this one) that put btrfs considerably slower than ext4. . I've seen benchmarks (eg: this one) that put btrfs considerably slower than ext4. On lower thread counts, it’s as much as 50% faster than EXT4. #6. Ext2 → Ext3 → Ext4. Not just permissions, but moving them or getting file sizes, too. If you omit the size parameter, a journal size based on the size of the file system is used. But EXT4 is mature, rock solid, and completely reliable, and the standard for most of the linux world. Zu diesen gehören eine integrierte RAID-Funktionalität, ein inkludierter Volume Manager und die Unterstützung von Dateisystemen bis 16EiB. While looking at the filesystem options it seems like BTRFS is a lot more stable than it was the last time I had to install arch so now I am seriously considering using it. Perhaps btrfs is much better for SSDs, but in oldschool HDDs I. 두 파일. When running PostMark, ZFS came out far ahead of the UFS file-systems being more than ten times faster than. Though EXT4 has few strong capabilities, it is reliable and well-maintained across all Linux operating systems. 1. Between 2T and 4T on a single disk, any of these would probably have similar performance. ) keep in mind that the performance are not the same depending on the chosen file system , also note that btrfs (video-1, video-2) may be a very good option because of its snapshot feature and data structure. XFS A number of Phoronix readers have been asking about some fresh file-system comparisons on recent kernels. BTRFS has (by far) the better ecosystem of tools and utilities. No such built-in compression support is in Ext4. Running this fio command, I get about 2. Compression is usually not very efficient on game data (that is already compressed) and can increase fragmentation. Out of curiosity I have tried BTRFS (still unstable so I can't really expect to be able to use it) and noticed that the read speed is about 150% of ext4 - while write speed is comparable. AdamV158. Backups and CoW, are why I use btrfs. Pro: supported by all distro's, commercial and not, and based on ext3, so it's widely tested, stable and proven. Otherwise use BTRFS. 3. Each of these file systems has its own way of organizing data, merits, and demerits. EXT4. I use ext4 everywhere. Btrfs uses Copy-on-Write (COW), a resource management technique where a. Each one might work for you based on YOUR needs! Supp. Probably those edge cases are not visible on an external USB hard drive, could be visible with external SSDs on a USB3. The checking task improved 14,6 %. XFS is a robust and mature 64-bit journaling file system that supports very large files and file systems on a single host. For example it's xfsdump/xfsrestore for xfs, dump/restore for ext2/3/4. 4 To 4. @taffer Your "recent benchmark" is from April 2015, over three years old and uses XFS with only default options. A maximum. A File system is one of the most important aspects that af. Như vậy, chúng ta có thể dễ dàng kết hợp các phân vùng định dạng Ext2, Ext3 và Ext4 trong cùng 1 ổ đĩa trong Ubuntu để tăng hiệu suất hoạt động. Another way to characterize this is that the Ext4 file system variants tend to perform better on systems that have limited I/O capability. By far, XFS can handle large data better than any other filesystem on this list and do it reliably too. EXT4 being the “safer” choice of the two, it is by the most commonly used FS in linux based systems, and most applications are developed and tested on EXT4. The SATA 3. 0, XFS is the default file system instead of ext4. For these reasons, Fedora has made BTRFS the standard filesystem in their newer releases. Currently I'm running on LVM with SSD caching and ext4 fs. all kinds for nice features (like extents, subsecond timestamps) which ext3 does not have. Downside is that it's a slower file system due to it's nature of redundancy. I used XFS until I managed to corrupt my partition table (my fault not XFS'). Between EXT4 and XFS which file system is better when an application uses multiple threads to read/write large amount of small files on a SSD. I have 6 disks so I have created 3 logical disks, 2 SSDs each - just for testing. 04 Disco Dingo was running on the Threadripper setup while using the Linux Git kernel from the mainline PPA. Use XFS for your array drives and Btrfs for your cache pool. Backups and CoW, are why I use btrfs. F2FS vs. It's stable and time-proven. Regarding boot drives : Use enterprise grade SSDs, do not use low budget commercial grade equipment. jkool702. This article provides a detailed comparison of the three file systems to help you decide which one is the best for your needs. Hi I never worry about it… my latest SSD SanDisk Extreme Pro 240GB has a 10 (limited) year 50GB a day warranty, Have OCZ’s with thousands of hours running btrfs all running fine. ) TL, DR: All 3 major next gen CoW file systems have their advantages and drawbacks, and I figure integrating them into my workflow is the only way to fairly evaluate them see how they work for myself. XFS는 1993년 Silicon Graphics에서 개발한 고성능의 64bit 저널링. Each of these file systems has its own way of. If it is only about reliability and you're in doubt, go with ext4, imho. 15 or newer (Please the same OS using same activating services and same apps!)Key Points: ZFS stands for Zettabyte filesystem. It takes a second to snapshot, and deletes of a snapshotted tree what takes ext4 26 hours is a few minutes on btrfs. File-systems tested on the NVMe SSD included Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS, and NTFS. I know the latest versions do not setup /home in a separate partition anymore but as a btrfs subvolume instead. The SATA 3. Você deve ativar as cotas na montagem inicial. the COW which saves alot of space and increases the speed. . 1. User quotas for each shared folder. Having this opportunity I wanted to put some hard numbers to my previous observations regarding ext4 vs Btrfs performance on my T430 running Qubes OS R4. Ext4 is the default system for most Distros. Usable space isn't a big issue but I don't want to lose half with RAID 10. ZFS is great but heavy/complex, and lack of block pointer rewrite can be painful. If fs performance is the only or most important thing for you, then use xfs - it's the clear winner, by far. Thanks 😊. But yeah, it's (BTRFS) a more complex filesystem with a bottomless pit of asterisks and gotchas attached to it, EXT4 is much more limited in scope and much simpler from a design perspective. 0-040700-generic (x86_64) Unity 7. NTFS OpenBenchmarking. You can hot swap drives without rebooting, remove failed drives, swap in a larger drive and remove the smaller one, all without preparing ahead of time to do so. The 3TB HDD are ext4. A) crater. This page is powered by a knowledgeable community that helps you make an informed decision. 8 snapshot as of last week. XFS doesn't have any RAID, while Btrfs RAID is not yet completely stable and is in its early days. But unless you intend to use these features, and know how to use them, they are useless. g. My problem is that in some games when DXVK is running in Linux, stutters occur, although there are no such problems on Windows. 這裡有 4 個關於 EXT4 和 Btrfs 的附加問題。在這裡查看答案。 1. In this Video we are going to cover Linux File System Types - Ext2,Ext3,Ext4,XFS,BTRFS | Linux File Systems Explained | Linux Tutorial for Beginners #linuxt. XFS is about as mainline as a non-ext filesystem gets under Linux. On a slow Linux box with an ext4 filesystem, the same operation takes less than a second. That one is solid and mature. Btrfs vs. The XFS file system is loved in the Linux community for its ability to handle and manage significant. If you're on HDD and you need the ability to shrink the fs, then use EXT4, but you lose any COW benefits. F2FS With Linux 4. Btrfs is not a successor to the default Ext4 file system used in most Linux distributions, but it can be expected to replace Ext4 in the future. Also I've thought about btrfs again. There was obviously some caching / lack of committing to disk involved that led to faster performance while the Btrfs file-system was in line with real-world expectations out of the. The use of checksums in Btrfs can prevent silent data corruption. The major difference between ext4 and XFS file systems is that the ext4 file system works better for fewer size files (single write/read thread) while the XFS works more efficiently. 1 fell slightly short of the Linux file-system performance. The preferable option depends on your specific needs and priorities. 我们主要讨论Linux中主流的三个文件系统：Ext4、XFS以及Btrfs的功能特点 ext4 文件系统由 ext3 文件系统改进而来，而后者又是从 ext2 文件系统改进而来。 虽然 ext4 文件系统已经非常稳定，是过去几年中绝大部分发行版的默认选择，但它是基于陈旧的代码开发而来。Linux 4. Snapraid says if the disk size is below 16TB there are no limitations, if above 16TB the parity drive has to be XFS because the parity is a single file and EXT4 has a file size limit of 16TB. Dropping performance in case with 4 threads for ext4 is a signal that there still are contention issues. Btrfs and Ext4 are Linux file systems but are. Btrfs is a more modern file system, introduced in 2007. The only time there were issues was when my RAM sticks went bad and btrfs detected it and put my FS into read-only mode to prevent corruption. because it spans multiple partitions, it's less likely to fill up your hard drive. This is fundamental in determining the file system’s capacity. Btrfs 與 EXT4 常見問題解答. From some of the recent Linux kernel patches, it seems some of the most popular Linux file systems, Flash-Friendly File System (F2FS), B-Tree Filesystem (Btrfs), and fourth extended filesystem. What we mean is that we need something like resize2fs (ext4) for enlarge or shrunk on the fly, and not required to use another filesystem to store the dump for the resizing. I haven't benchmarked the performance but as a user on a modern desktop/laptop system with fast ssd, f2fs vs btrfs didn't show any. 7. Not a ton of bells and whistles, but they Just Work. On multi-drive systems, the opposite might be true, zfs outperforming ext4. a 3-drive RAID-Z (or RAID-5) would have the same capacity as a 4-drive pool of two mirrored pairs (or RAID-10). As the load increased, both of the filesystems were limited by the throughput of the underlying hardware, but XFS still maintained its lead. ) XFS. The fastest for the SATA/USB tests was XFS followed quickly by EXT4 and then F2FS. Various internet sources suggest that XFS is faster and better, but taking into account that they also suggest that EXT4 is. We may have lengthy talk on ext vs XFS vs f2fs and btrfs vs zfs and there are many more points to be mentioned, but for regular users. Tính năng tự khôi phục tập tin. Edit: I managed to save the two NTFS HDDs with chkdsk, but the exFAT drive just didn't wanna play ball. For BTRFS, the overall throughput is fairly low (~30k tps), while the jitter is somewhat better and worse than for EXT4/XFS at the same time. Uma das decisões que você tem que tomar quando vai instalar qualquer distro Linux é o Sistema de arquivos do Linux! São vários para escolher, EXT4, XFS e BTR. Yes Ext4 is much easier to setup but BTRFS has its advantages. 7 - Btrfs vs. 7. It was also 164% faster in post-snapshot reads and 17% faster in post-snapshot writes. My problem is that in some games when DXVK is running in Linux, stutters occur, although there are no such problems on Windows. . 7. BtrFS RAID 6 implementation is "mostly working", see here:Since btrfs doesn't have something comparable to the ZVOL the best you can do is use subvolumes which must always use the btrfs file system. The XFS one on the other hand take around 11-13 hours!With Bcachefs on its trek towards the mainline Linux kernel, this week I conducted some benchmarks using the very latest Bcachefs file-system code and compared its performance to the mainline Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS file-system competitors on both rotating and solid-state storage. We recommend btrfs for testing, development, and any non-critical deployments. XFS still has some reliability issues, but could be good for a large data store where speed matters but rare data loss (e. Each of the five file-systems were tested on the same NVM Express SSD from the Linux 4. Same as with ZFS. The total throughput is better than with ZFS (40k vs 60k), but the jitter is more severe. showed that at the time the performance for the RAID setup was not able to compete with ext4 and ZFS. 특히 시놀로지에서는 데이터 보호와 백업의 용이함을 장점으로 내세운 Btrfs를 권장합니다. Now, lot of development efforts are pushed to Btrfs development and most probably it will become next generation default FS for Linux, a successor of EXT4. Back when Bcachefs debuted in 2015 I ran some initial. A continuación, os vamos a explicar brevemente las principales características de EXT4 y de Btrfs. 38. The total throughput is better than with ZFS (40k vs 60k), but the jitter is more severe. Btrfs（技术预览）" 6. The most commonly used are Ext4, Btrfs, XFS, and ZFS which is the most recent file system released back in 2018. . Subvolumes do not have a size, so the Desired. That bug apart, any delayed allocation filesystem (ext4 and btrfs included) will lose a significant number or un-synched data in case of uncontrolled poweroff. . That's right, XFS "repairs" errors on the fly, whereas ext4 requires you to remount read-only and fsck. sorry, i got that second sentence wrong. ext4 is not recommended. Data Colossi & Data Centers: Ext4 is non-negotiable for handling extensive data transactions. 再將資料再回存到 NAS, 這部份會花費很多時間. ran btrfs balance to balance all btrfs volumes. - Linux Kernel 5. EXT4 vs. This is why XFS might be a great candidate for an SSD. BTRFS vs EXT4 speed and compression. 1 million iops for ext4, right in line with the spec of the drive times 2,. But I was more talking to the XFS vs EXT4 comparison. Support for large file sizes - The Ext4 supports a single file size of up to 16 TiB ( Tebibytes ) whereas XFS supports a max file size of up to 8 exbibytes. Este vídeo muestra el rendimiento de los sistemas de archivos mas usados en un entorno muy parecido al que se encuentra en producción en servidores de archiv. BTRFS is newer, and the performance is not as good in many cases, but it is not far off. ZFS on FreeBSD may be faster than BTRFS on Linux. It also wasn't formatted with -m finobt=1 which is a game-changer for XFS performance with small files and heavy metadata updates. 0 mainline kernel and using the stock mount options. If you do hardware RAID, with a dedicated RAID card, just do not use ZFS please, it will break your data at some point. XFS vs. Things like snapshots, copy-on-write, checksums and more. NTFS. Multimedia Sanctuaries: With large files as daily bread, ext4 is indispensable. Its not faster or more stable then the other two. ZFS is open source, it isn't "owned" by Oracle. Btrfs (pronounced as Butter FS, Better FS, or B-Tree FS) Considering that the btrfs will be able for spanning over the multiple hard drives, it is a very good poit that it can support 16 times more drive space than the ext4. In the end I use ext4 as trustworthy frontend, and btrfs as a unreliable backup. 10. e. Btrfs is one of the most popular newly created file systems, and was. 하지만 리소스 문제나 호환성 등을 생각한다면 EXT4도 포기할 수 없죠. Fwiw, I think XFS still handles huge files better than EXT, so there are reasons to use it. Optane SSD RAID Performance With ZFS On Linux, EXT4, XFS, Btrfs, F2FS Storage : 2019-06-20: FreeBSD ZFS vs. It supports large file systems and provides excellent scalability and reliability. The ext4 file system is still fully supported in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 and can be selected at installation. you don't have to think about what you're doing because it's what. On the other hand, backup of xfs to xfs allows you certain features that. Tbh, it depends on game by game basis Team Fortress 2 will go as low as nearly 50%, same for KSP. In my second round I made setups with btrfs on the nvme SSD and luks+btrfs on 2TB HDD as RAID1. F2FS vs. Main features: Data protection features, including snapshot, replication, and point-in-time recovery. We will determine which one is the best ZFS, BTRFS, and EXT4. A daily snapshot of Ubuntu 19. BTRFS has better backup capabilities, but is considered less stable, despite it working for me just fine with my testing of it. This process have two main steps: 1. 0 mainline kernel and using the stock mount options. 3. For reducing the size of a filesystem, there are two purported wats forward, according to xfs developers. The thing is I'm putting /home in a separate HDD. EarthyFeet. これらのファイルシステムはEXT4、Btrfs、ZFSであり、XNUMXつのファイルシステムは異なる特性を持ち、いくつかは異なるシナリオでより優れたパフォーマンスを発揮します。 外部4. Nhân bản toàn bộ Share. However benchmarks test quite narrow parameters which may not be reflected by running an OS. 其他 ext4 文件系统实用程序 6. Ability to shrink filesystem. BTRFS solves all the problems I had so far: supports online resizing - both extending and shrinking. Compared to Ext4, XFS has a relatively poor performance for single threaded, metadata-intensive workloads. The only benefit of btrfs that I could find was marginally easier setup and the software license. So I moved everything off of it and formatted it into XFS and ate the 0,5% space loss for peace of mind. 14 stable and Linux 3. Example 2: ZFS has licensing issues to Distribution-wide support is spotty. Nowadays btrfs is very stable and the tools to recover from fs corruption have been getting much better as well. というのをベースにするとXFSが良い。 一般的にlinuxのブロックサイズは4kなので、xfsのほうが良さそう。 MySQLでページサイズ大きめならext4でもよい。xfsだとブロックサイズが大きくなるにつれて遅くなってる傾向が見える。 Ext4 is the default file system on most Linux distributions for a reason. Features of the XFS and ZFS. However, the performance of ZFS on FreeBSD/PC-BSD 8. Ext4 fs can read and write to Ext2 or Ext3 file systems, but the Ext4 it is not compatible with Ext2 and Ext3 drivers. In general, Ext3 or Ext4 is better if an application uses a single read/write thread and small files, while XFS shines when an application uses multiple read/write threads and bigger files7. Checksumming, along with copy-on-write, provides the key method of ensuring file system integrity after unexpected power loss. . With btrfs I got 130-160MB. Además, el rendimiento en una sola unidad giratoria generalmente tendrá la unidad como el eslabón más débil. Ext4 se basa en una tecnología más antigua, por lo que carece de las características modernas del sistema de archivos que se encuentran en sistemas como E2FS y BtrFS. Changing the storage driver will make any containers you have already created inaccessible on the local system. Linux 5. Abstract and Figures. Ext4 specially without a journal and XFS are both extremely fast. 1. Windows has always been terribly slow to update, say, all file permissions in a large directory structure. However, the performance of ZFS on FreeBSD/PC-BSD 8. F2FS vs. Reasons why I use LVM/ext4: I'm used to it. Using: - A full partition in a single 1TB or 2TB NVMe SSD. For single disks over 4T, I would consider xfs over zfs or ext4. 0 File-System Benchmarks: Btrfs vs. The most commonly used are Ext4, Btrfs, XFS, and ZFS which is the most recent file system released back in 2018. 불가능. Mount the partition and test the conversion by checking the files. For the adventurous: you can define block devices on btrfs and use ext4 on those block devices (ext4 on btrfs). Linux File System Comparison: XFS vs. The btrfs backup multi-disk arrangement, of different disk sizes in single mode was for me a trial of btrfs. But. Considering that the btrfs will be able for spanning over the multiple hard drives, it is a very good thing that it can support 16 times more drive space than the ext4. Ext4 has some scalability and performance issues when dealing with large or fragmented files or directories. If you're truly after space with no redundancy then you might as well go RAID0 or no raid at all with only two drives. However, I was using the openSUSE's default partition layout, which is btrfs for / and xfs for /home. Btrfs lacks maturity and stability at the time of this writing but is more feature-rich compared to EXT4. For the most. Also, reducing the life of my SSD by a month is worth winning an argument from which I get absolutely no benefit. On the other hand BTRFS, while mainlined, has many important issues and performance problem (the common suggestion for databases or VMs is to disable CoW which, in turn, disabled checksumming - which is, frankly, not an acceptable answer). 3. Btrfs is expected to offer better. The one they your distribution recommends. 0 hard drive when using EXT4 and XFS. You didn't provide the Linux distribution information, but assuming CentOS or Red Hat, XFS is now somewhat integrated. Either way you go, just leave EXT4 where it is, in the ground. But. Rationale is native Linux nature, vs xfs being Linux supported. All of these Linux. Since then I have come to value tooling about as much as performance. Mount ntfs drives only read only. Tính năng sao chép dữ liệu. It is backward-compatible with older versions of Ext. 3. All my systems (4) have been using BTRFS for some time now without any issues. XFS supports larger file sizes and. A number of Phoronix readers have been asking about some fresh file-system comparisons on recent kernels. removes the need for LVM and thus eliminates 1 layer for filesystem-ing (if that’s a word) On top of that, in 2008, the principal developer of EXT3 and. EXT3 이후 나온 EXT4는 기존 버전보다 안정성은 향상이 되었지만 범용성과. The benchmark results of three most common file systems under Linux environment were given in this paper. Potential for data loss: While btrfs has features to protect against data loss, these features can be complex to configure and may not always work as intended, leading to the possibility of data loss. file-system comparison, here are some fresh benchmarks looking at the Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS file-system benchmarks on a speedy WD_BLACK SN850 NVMe. For anything with higher capability, XFS tends to be faster. 1 interface. /boot/efi has to be FAT32 (assuming you are using it as the ESP and not just adding partitions extra partitions under /boot to test how robust the boot sequence is). The XFS File System. Utilice. Edit: fsdump / fsrestore means the corresponding system backup and restore to for that file system. I had no bad experience myself with btrfs so far, but still have not tried it with anything more complex than raid1 over a long time and while I assume many horror stories out there are just deprecated as btrfs keeps improving, it can do a lot more than ext4. Various benchmarks have concluded that the actual ext4 file system can perform a variety of read-write operations faster than an NTFS partition. May 1, 2016 at 10:46. File-systems tested on the NVMe SSD included Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS, and NTFS. Small to Medium Enterprises: While ext3 suffices for businesses with modest data needs, scalability visionaries would do well considering ext4. Your gaming performance shouldn't be affected by either, since games are mostly just reads anyways. Performance: Ext4 performs better in everyday tasks and is faster for small file writes. 0. Já que muitos usuários Linux, que desejam experimentar o novo sistema, vêm do Ext4, faz sentido enumerar alguns pontos que realçam as diferenças entre os dois: O Ext4 ainda é a melhor escolha, no desktop do usuário comum — por ser mais rápido na transferência de arquivos e por ser mais maduro6,861. Now Fedora just needs to implement it properly like openSUSE. Comentado el.