LinuxQuestions.org
Visit the LQ Articles and Editorials section
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > LinuxQuestions.org > Linux - News > Syndicated Linux News
User Name
Password
Syndicated Linux News This forum is for the discussion of Syndicated Linux News stories.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-19-2013, 11:40 AM   #1
LXer
LXer NewsBot
 
Registered: Dec 2005
Posts: 73,354

Rep: Reputation: 82
LXer: MTE Explains: What Is Btrfs Filesystem (and Why Is It Better Than Ext4)?


Published at LXer:

There is more to a hard drive than its size. While the amount of disk space is all you see marketed about a hard drive on a sales page, there is actually an extensive amount of coding that goes into making a hard drive capable of handling your applications and data in the first place. Most Linux distributions currently default to using the ext4 file system, but the future for many of them lies with the B-tree file system, better known as Btrfs.

Read More...
 
Old 02-19-2013, 12:28 PM   #2
H_TeXMeX_H
Guru
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Location: $RANDOM
Distribution: slackware64
Posts: 12,928
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269Reputation: 1269
I'm sorry, but I don't believe it, and there are errors.

btrfs uses a B-tree, and ext4 uses a hashed B-tree. B-tree being a binary search tree.

Maybe what you mean is that the future of filesystems likes with the B+ tree, like NTFS, JFS, XFS, ReiserFS ...
Quote:
The primary value of a B+ tree is in storing data for efficient retrieval in a block-oriented storage context—in particular, filesystems. This is primarily because unlike binary search trees, B+ trees have very high fanout (typically on the order of 100 or more), which reduces the number of I/O operations required to find an element in the tree.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%2B_tree

Also, if you want a nice comparison of features see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_systems

Note that both JFS and XFS have very high file and volume size limits. Also note that no current storage systems you can buy even come close to ext4 limits.

Also note that btrfs does NOT have a working fsck, unlike all other available Linux filesystems. If you check the benchmarks you will also note that its performance on SSDs is lacking, while JFS and XFS have very good performance:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...38_large&num=1

Last edited by H_TeXMeX_H; 02-19-2013 at 12:35 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Filesystem for SSD disk: BTRFS vs NILFS2 vs EXT4 ruppertus Linux - General 10 04-19-2012 12:19 AM
LXer: Linux 3.3 Kernel: Btrfs vs. EXT4 LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 03-02-2012 12:20 PM
LXer: Btrfs Battles EXT4 With The Linux 2.6.33 Kernel LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-21-2010 05:31 PM
LXer: EXT4, Btrfs, NILFS2 Performance Benchmarks LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 06-29-2009 02:50 AM
LXer: Ext4 to be standard for Fedora 11, Btrfs also included LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-23-2009 01:01 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:42 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration