i was wondering, does the ext4 file system increases performance/speed in any way compered to the stock one which comes with Froyo?
what are the advantages/disadvantages of ext4 in general?
thanks
Advantages:
-Faster read/write performance resulting in significantly less lag everywhere on the phone
Disadvantages:
-Requires a one-time conversion, usually taking up to 10 minutes at boot time.
i went back to stock 2.2 for the 1st time in months after i got bootloops when i did something wrong flashing simply honey and it seemed well slow and laggy compared to simply galaxy 2.8 with voodoo
}{Alienz}{ said:
Advantages:
-Faster read/write performance resulting in significantly less lag everywhere on the phone
Disadvantages:
-Requires a one-time conversion, usually taking up to 10 minutes at boot time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so in general ext4 is quicker then stock file system?
is the faster read/write performance comes at a price in terms of battery life?
http://tinyurl.com/3qbmrv9
DO the first link!
(This is in part a shout out to "moviexxxxxxx"lol can't remember ur name)
*EDIT*
His name is Robert Paulson....... No its not, its movieaddict. Oh yea!
DR-EVIL23 said:
so in general ext4 is quicker then stock file system?
is the faster read/write performance comes at a price in terms of battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i've only been on RFS or whatever its called on stock and my stock 2.2 battery was useless, got like 9 hours moderate use
on simply galaxy 2.8 on ext4 i got like 30 hours with the same use but thats with different kernel and modem etc
im guessing there wont be any difference in battery with same kernel with voodoo on or off
its movieaddict, lol! funny post
Related
If you know, please list the advantages of having an EXT4 file system, I have searched the forums, but came up with nothing specific. I'm more concerned with the performance gains than cosmetic ones (ie, read and write access versus directory organization) but any info you have would be interesting.
i found this
clicky
but I wondered if anyone could dumb it down for a linux noobie
EDIT:
To tie this in with the Atrix Specifically, their are 2 versions of the EternityProject Kernel, one with EXT3 and one with EXT4, and I wondered if I would get performance boosts for EXT4.
OK this is going to be very simple, so a lot of people will probably quibble with what I am going to say, it is a very complex subject.
ext2 was great and fast, along came ext3, slower but the added features far outweighed the disadvantages
When ext4 come out a lot of people avoided it as "buggy" Most if not all the bugs have been removed or fixed
Ext4 adds speed to ext3 and allows for some truly massive files
So IMHO if you want rock solid ext3, but if you want a faster system with more features and a small chance of bugs then ext4
What are some of the added features?
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
well this is pretty straight forward list
http://www.thegeekstuff.com/2011/05/ext2-ext3-ext4/
from that link here is a short list of ext4
Ext4 stands for fourth extended file system.
It was introduced in 2008.
Starting from Linux Kernel 2.6.19 ext4 was available.
Supports huge individual file size and overall file system size.
Maximum individual file size can be from 16 GB to 16 TB
Overall maximum ext4 file system size is 1 EB (exabyte). 1 EB = 1024 PB (petabyte). 1 PB = 1024 TB (terabyte).
Directory can contain a maximum of 64,000 subdirectories (as opposed to 32,000 in ext3)
You can also mount an existing ext3 fs as ext4 fs (without having to upgrade it).
Several other new features are introduced in ext4: multiblock allocation, delayed allocation, journal checksum. fast fsck, etc. All you need to know is that these new features have improved the performance and reliability of the filesystem when compared to ext3.
In ext4, you also have the option of turning the journaling feature “off”.
Tao_Man said:
well this is pretty straight forward list
http://www.thegeekstuff.com/2011/05/ext2-ext3-ext4/
from that link here is a short list of ext4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool stuff! What is the maximum micro SD Card size? 32 GB! I suspect that ext3 will work well enough for now.
papakilo10 said:
Cool stuff! What is the maximum micro SD Card size? 32 GB! I suspect that ext3 will work well enough for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes.
That exabyte, is scaryyy....
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Thanks, Tao_Man, for the much easier to understand link.
Tao_Man said:
Several other new features are introduced in ext4: multiblock allocation, delayed allocation, journal checksum. fast fsck, etc. All you need to know is that these new features have improved the performance and reliability of the filesystem when compared to ext3.
In ext4, you also have the option of turning the journaling feature “off”.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think ^^ means faster. Wonder if it is noticeable.
Either way, it's pretty cool that the EternityProject Kernel is the first one using this new fs on the Atrix.
Thanks again!
capnsouth said:
Thanks, Tao_Man, for the much easier to understand link.
I think ^^ means faster. Wonder if it is noticeable.
Either way, it's pretty cool that the EternityProject Kernel is the first one using this new fs on the Atrix.
Thanks again!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
faux123 said:
Haha, the difference is EXT3 vs EXT4. I reverted back to EXT3 to be in line with cyanogenmod. I will release an EXT4 version sometimes later
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Faux was using EXT4 for his CM7 kernel, but reverted back to EXT3 and people noticed a drop in quadrant numbers from 4000 to 3700 or so. not a HUGE difference, but enough that some people are gonna prefer the EXT4 kernel.
I'm debating on taking back my device due to getting such low stock Quadrant scores. Around 850 stock on average.
What's everyone else getting? Am I the only one with such low scores? I appreciate any feedback!
Benchmarks are worthless in general, Quadrant is incredibly worthless because it doesn't break down the scores and is EASILY gamed.
For example, disabling per-file fsync on an ext4 system gains you 600 points or so instantly.
Enabling Stagefright on Samsungs gets you 500-1000 points but breaks media playback.
I'm not talking about using mods at all though. I'm just saying I'm getting half of what I've seen as the average STOCK 1Ghz score for this device. My 800 @ 1Ghz vs. others 1600-ish @ 1GHz. I just want to know if anyone else is getting around my scores (800ish) without mods.
What other devices?
I get about 1300-1400 stock...
Hi,
I just ran it on my (US/rooted) SGP5, and got 947.
I noticed that on the comparison graph, there's Samsung Galaxy S, that had slightly lower number ...
Jim
P.S. FYI, I used Fast Boot, to kill all processes, just before running the Quadrant test. I'm not sure if that affected anything.
BTW, Quadrant gives HEAVY weighting to file I/O scores - so Voodoo Lagfix-enabled devices and native-ext4 ones will smoke RFS devices.
tcb4 said:
I get about 1300-1400 stock...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi,
Wow! Do you know how you got such scores? What have you done to your device (and what is it)?
As I posted, I just got 947 on my SGP5. It's stock, other than being rooted.
Jim
Entropy,
Your completely missing my point... Here it is again. "My SGP5 is getting around 850~average scores on Quadrant stock, as in, in the state it was when I took it out of the box. Reviewers and other owners of this device are getting much higher quadrant scores with their STOCK devices as well.
When I overclock to 1.3GHz, I get around 1400 average while other SGP5's get around 2k+ at 1.3GHz. I just want to see how many are also experiencing such low scores as I am.
As I said, many of the reviewers online say that the SGP5 gets around 1400-1600 with Quadrant without any modifications or rooting. I get around 850. Please stop with the "Well Quadrant isn't accurate because, if you mod it like this.. you get this", I'll say it again, My. Device. Is. Stock. It's not modified, I didn't do anything to it to boost the score or lower it.
You're missing my point.
Quadrant is unreliable and inconsistent as hell. It can vary by hundreds of points from run to run, it's easily gamed, it will do weird unpredictable things if you look at it the wrong way. Plain and simple, it sucks and its results are utterly and completely worthless.
You ARE benchmarking with the CPU governor set to performance, right? Benchmarks with the governor in play are even more worthless and variable.
I just saw 600 points difference between two runs with the same kernel - 992 once, 1619 the next.
I've gotten consistent bench marking results every time, consistently low, but consistant.... Do you own a SGP and can say this from experience or just because you have a similar Android device? I actually own a SGP5 and haven't seen the "992 once, 1619 next" at all... I've never gotten above 1619 or ever had a jump of more than 100 on the same frequency.
Unless your testing this for yourself on the device in question, please stop once again...
Yes, I own an SGP 5. I unboxed it last night. I actually ran Quadrant again, 1700 the next time around. Just more evidence that it's crappy and meaningless. Benchmarks in general suck, but Quadrant is especially bad. At least Antutu is fairly consistent AND breaks out scores by category.
It's consistent with every other device I've ever owned - run-to-run variances of a few hundred points.
Note that over time, your scores will go down on this device because RFS sucks and becomes slower as it's used, and as I said, I/O performance is weighted HEAVILY.
RFS sucking is a known problem with old Samsungs, that's why Voodoo Lagfix exists.
Returning a device based on Quadrant scores is stupid on an epic scale given what a horrifically worthless and inconsistent benchmark it is...
Around 1300.
Heh, anyways.
What's Voodoo lagfix? And RTS? If you don't mind me asking, not familiar with those two. And so far it performs pretty well @ 1.5GHz with 2000+ quad scores, downloading Antutu now.
ZaIINN said:
Heh, anyways.
What's Voodoo lagfix? And RTS? If you don't mind me asking, not familiar with those two. And so far it performs pretty well @ 1.5GHz with 2000+ quad scores, downloading Antutu now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RFS is ? File System - it's some special Samsung file system that just kinda sucks.
ext4 is the current standard Android filesystem format, which is MUCH better.
(think of it as being like NTFS vs FAT on a PC)
Voodoo Lagfix is a set of initramfs scripts that automatically convert RFS partitions to ext4, improving read/write performance a lot.
Entropy512 said:
RFS is ? File System - it's some special Samsung file system that just kinda sucks.
ext4 is the current standard Android filesystem format, which is MUCH better.
(think of it as being like NTFS vs FAT on a PC)
Voodoo Lagfix is a set of initramfs scripts that automatically convert RFS partitions to ext4, improving read/write performance a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah interesting, I looked into the Lagfix; Think it would work the same for the SGP as it does for the galaxy?
ZaIINN said:
Ah interesting, I looked into the Lagfix; Think it would work the same for the SGP as it does for the galaxy?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes - it's on my todo list once I get CWM to play nice.
So, everybody(somebody)((nobody)), explain to me the advantages of ext4 w/o journaling. I understand that write speeds for sd cards(?) is supposed to be better. My question is, where do we see the advantages? I ran an antutu benchmark on my phone and the write speeds were not the insane 150mb/s-ish write speed scores that Neutrino did when he posted that photo on his thread a while back, something more like a class 10 score IIRC. Anybody that can shed some light on this will receive my thanks!
Running Neutrino v2.0 EE
Nick
Take a look at this post http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1010807.
He explains well about boosting sd cards speed. You can do that by using Rom Toolbox which you can download in the Market. If you want to try it with Rom Toolbox, it's under Performance -> SD Boost and you'd like to change the default value, normally 128, to 1024 or 2048.
nickvisel said:
So, everybody(somebody)((nobody)), explain to me the advantages of ext4 w/o journaling. I understand that write speeds for sd cards(?) is supposed to be better. My question is, where do we see the advantages? I ran an antutu benchmark on my phone and the write speeds were not the insane 150mb/s-ish write speed scores that Neutrino did when he posted that photo on his thread a while back, something more like a class 10 score IIRC. Anybody that can shed some light on this will receive my thanks!
Running Neutrino v2.0 EE
Nick
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everything just runs faster and smoother. You may not notice it, but if you revert back to a stock ROM, you will feel frustrated as it'll feel much slower/choppier.
And those insane write speeds were due to GT-S mod, not because of Ext4.
Ahh that was my blunder. Thanks for clarifying.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Hello,
I've bought a used SGS2 (i9100, 16GB) about two years ago, and IO performance degraded a lot since I got it. It's really bad as of few last months (kinda sorta what happened with every Nexus 7 pre-4.3), and I'm wondering whenever there's any way to improve it? While sequential/random reads are okay(ish), SQLite operations and any writes are painfully slow. Here's a benchmark (AndroBench 3.4, default settings) done after rebooting. The same thing happens on all Samsung ROMs (my daily driver is Chameleon 3.0.4 by jazzk with Apolo 4.13, row as IO scheduler) and some AOSP ROMs (AOKP 4.1.2, CM11 M2 the last time I've checked them out), so I'm pretty sure this isn't ROM-dependent. Wiping /data, /system and all caches, then restoring a backup improves these for some time, but it gets annoying (also, it takes about 20-30mins to complete ;_. My eMMC chip is suspectible to a brickbug (VTU00M), and apps TRIMming internal memory have FAQs, which note that there are dead Samsung devices due to this brickbug (/data and /sdcard is mounted with discard by default, so this most probably wouldn't change anything, but just in case...).
So, is this IO performance degradation normal? And, is there anything I can use to improve the internal memory's performance?
My NAND (internal storage) speed is really low, 15mb/s read and about 6mb/s write, tested with A1 SD app. I'm running Mokee's 6.0.1 ROM, and it's the best one I've tested so far, with minimal lags, but it seems that the age of the phone's NAND is really showing.
I have it installed in Stock rom slot (safestrap 3.75), which is supposed to be the fastest one, but I still get a lot of unresponsiveness from time to time (much less than on other roms, but still). It's a criminally slow read/write speed, and I'm aware that it's the phone being 6 years old and quite used at fault, but is there any way of improving that speed, any tweaks, setups, etc? Does setting read-ahead to 4096 help? Or setting up something in the recovery?
Can I use my sdcard (64GB external sandisk extreme) as a ramdisk to boost up performance or something?
RAZR XT910 btw.