mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4 in 2019Which “features” of ext4 existing ext4 partition uses?Ext4 partition bigger than 2TB?ext4 filesystem brokenLinux ext4 “extents” attributerecreating ext4 journal: reboot required?How to extend an ext4 partition and filesystem?Linux filesystem ext4 fragmentationRemove the 64bit option from ext4 filesystemEXT4 filesystem corruptionExt4 usage and performance
Will there be more tax deductions if I put the house completely under my name, versus doing a joint ownership?
What was Varys trying to do at the beginning of S08E05?
Capital gains on stocks sold to take initial investment off the table
Testing blind license applicants
Do people who work at research institutes consider themselves "academics"?
Given 0s on Assignments with suspected and dismissed cheating?
Does addError() work outside of triggers?
2 parabolas through 4 points
Can I say: "When was your train leaving?" if the train leaves in the future?
What information exactly does an instruction cache store?
Assembly writer vs compiler
Is there any good reason to write "it is easy to see"?
Wifi is sometimes soft blocked by unknown service
Why is Drogon so much better in battle than Rhaegal and Viserion?
Why are lawsuits between the President and Congress not automatically sent to the Supreme Court
How to redirect stdout to a file, and stdout+stderr to another one?
Why when I add jam to my tea it stops producing thin "membrane" on top?
Holding rent money for my friend which amounts to over $10k?
tikz drawing rectangle discretized with triangle lattices and its centroids
Is the seat-belt sign activation when a pilot goes to the lavatory standard procedure?
Will consteval functions allow template parameters dependent on function arguments?
Could there be something like aerobatic smoke trails in the vacuum of space?
UUID type for NEWID()
Can a tourist shoot a gun in the USA?
mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4 in 2019
Which “features” of ext4 existing ext4 partition uses?Ext4 partition bigger than 2TB?ext4 filesystem brokenLinux ext4 “extents” attributerecreating ext4 journal: reboot required?How to extend an ext4 partition and filesystem?Linux filesystem ext4 fragmentationRemove the 64bit option from ext4 filesystemEXT4 filesystem corruptionExt4 usage and performance
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
Thomas Krenn recommends creating ext4 partitions like:
https://www.thomas-krenn.com/de/wiki/FSCK_Best_Practices
mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4
what does this mean?
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
"A user should be able to turn on this feature at mke2fs time simply by specifying -O metadata_csum. Because the 64bit feature allows arbitrarily large block group descriptors that are large enough to enable crc32c for the bitmaps, mke2fs should warn the user if the feature set is metadata_csum,^64bit when it becomes the case that the 64bit feature has been tested thoroughly."
https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Metadata_Checksums
what is recommended? move to btrfs?
thanks!
filesystems ext4
add a comment |
Thomas Krenn recommends creating ext4 partitions like:
https://www.thomas-krenn.com/de/wiki/FSCK_Best_Practices
mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4
what does this mean?
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
"A user should be able to turn on this feature at mke2fs time simply by specifying -O metadata_csum. Because the 64bit feature allows arbitrarily large block group descriptors that are large enough to enable crc32c for the bitmaps, mke2fs should warn the user if the feature set is metadata_csum,^64bit when it becomes the case that the 64bit feature has been tested thoroughly."
https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Metadata_Checksums
what is recommended? move to btrfs?
thanks!
filesystems ext4
2
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55
add a comment |
Thomas Krenn recommends creating ext4 partitions like:
https://www.thomas-krenn.com/de/wiki/FSCK_Best_Practices
mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4
what does this mean?
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
"A user should be able to turn on this feature at mke2fs time simply by specifying -O metadata_csum. Because the 64bit feature allows arbitrarily large block group descriptors that are large enough to enable crc32c for the bitmaps, mke2fs should warn the user if the feature set is metadata_csum,^64bit when it becomes the case that the 64bit feature has been tested thoroughly."
https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Metadata_Checksums
what is recommended? move to btrfs?
thanks!
filesystems ext4
Thomas Krenn recommends creating ext4 partitions like:
https://www.thomas-krenn.com/de/wiki/FSCK_Best_Practices
mkfs -O ^64bit,^metadata_csum -t ext4
what does this mean?
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2038_problem
"A user should be able to turn on this feature at mke2fs time simply by specifying -O metadata_csum. Because the 64bit feature allows arbitrarily large block group descriptors that are large enough to enable crc32c for the bitmaps, mke2fs should warn the user if the feature set is metadata_csum,^64bit when it becomes the case that the 64bit feature has been tested thoroughly."
https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Metadata_Checksums
what is recommended? move to btrfs?
thanks!
filesystems ext4
filesystems ext4
asked Jan 25 at 8:02
canoodlecanoodle
283
283
2
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55
add a comment |
2
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55
2
2
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
what does this mean?
simple what you may run into compatibility troubles by using this features now (and they are the defaults for modern mkfs setup), so it's better to keep them off until explicitly requested
https://askubuntu.com/questions/747656/ext4-broken-file-system-on-ubuntu-14-04-4 - good example (the author was naive enough to blindly follow some others instruction, not knowing what the commands do - so he seems lost all his disk instead of fixing it ;-)
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
nay, just turns off questionable additional features - one is not well-tested, second is depended of first but not enforces it (so kernel may crash someday), both breaks fsck on older platforms.
as for btrfs - you better try it yourself. Sometimes it fits well, sometimes redhat-enforced configurations with xfs+lvm suits better, sometimes it just doesn't worth the time - ext4 still "just works" for most common uses.
add a comment |
From kernel document
metadata_csum and 64bit
Starting in early 2012, metadata checksums were added to all major ext4
and jbd2 data structures. The associated feature flag is metadata_csum.
The desired checksum algorithm is indicated in the superblock, though as
of October 2012 the only supported algorithm is crc32c. Some data
structures did not have space to fit a full 32-bit checksum, so only the
lower 16 bits are stored. Enabling the 64bit feature increases the data
structure size so that full 32-bit checksums can be stored for many data
structures. However, existing 32-bit filesystems cannot be extended to
enable 64bit mode, at least not without the experimental resize2fs
patches to do so.
Existing filesystems can have checksumming added by running
**tune2fs -O metadata_csum** against the underlying device. If tune2fs
encounters directory blocks that lack sufficient empty space to add a
checksum, it will request that you run **e2fsck -D** to have the
directories rebuilt with checksums. This has the added benefit of
removing slack space from the directory files and rebalancing the htree
indexes. If you _ignore_ this step, your directories will not be
protected by a checksum!
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "2"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f950704%2fmkfs-o-64bit-metadata-csum-t-ext4-in-2019%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
what does this mean?
simple what you may run into compatibility troubles by using this features now (and they are the defaults for modern mkfs setup), so it's better to keep them off until explicitly requested
https://askubuntu.com/questions/747656/ext4-broken-file-system-on-ubuntu-14-04-4 - good example (the author was naive enough to blindly follow some others instruction, not knowing what the commands do - so he seems lost all his disk instead of fixing it ;-)
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
nay, just turns off questionable additional features - one is not well-tested, second is depended of first but not enforces it (so kernel may crash someday), both breaks fsck on older platforms.
as for btrfs - you better try it yourself. Sometimes it fits well, sometimes redhat-enforced configurations with xfs+lvm suits better, sometimes it just doesn't worth the time - ext4 still "just works" for most common uses.
add a comment |
what does this mean?
simple what you may run into compatibility troubles by using this features now (and they are the defaults for modern mkfs setup), so it's better to keep them off until explicitly requested
https://askubuntu.com/questions/747656/ext4-broken-file-system-on-ubuntu-14-04-4 - good example (the author was naive enough to blindly follow some others instruction, not knowing what the commands do - so he seems lost all his disk instead of fixing it ;-)
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
nay, just turns off questionable additional features - one is not well-tested, second is depended of first but not enforces it (so kernel may crash someday), both breaks fsck on older platforms.
as for btrfs - you better try it yourself. Sometimes it fits well, sometimes redhat-enforced configurations with xfs+lvm suits better, sometimes it just doesn't worth the time - ext4 still "just works" for most common uses.
add a comment |
what does this mean?
simple what you may run into compatibility troubles by using this features now (and they are the defaults for modern mkfs setup), so it's better to keep them off until explicitly requested
https://askubuntu.com/questions/747656/ext4-broken-file-system-on-ubuntu-14-04-4 - good example (the author was naive enough to blindly follow some others instruction, not knowing what the commands do - so he seems lost all his disk instead of fixing it ;-)
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
nay, just turns off questionable additional features - one is not well-tested, second is depended of first but not enforces it (so kernel may crash someday), both breaks fsck on older platforms.
as for btrfs - you better try it yourself. Sometimes it fits well, sometimes redhat-enforced configurations with xfs+lvm suits better, sometimes it just doesn't worth the time - ext4 still "just works" for most common uses.
what does this mean?
simple what you may run into compatibility troubles by using this features now (and they are the defaults for modern mkfs setup), so it's better to keep them off until explicitly requested
https://askubuntu.com/questions/747656/ext4-broken-file-system-on-ubuntu-14-04-4 - good example (the author was naive enough to blindly follow some others instruction, not knowing what the commands do - so he seems lost all his disk instead of fixing it ;-)
does this have anything to do with the y2038 problem?
nay, just turns off questionable additional features - one is not well-tested, second is depended of first but not enforces it (so kernel may crash someday), both breaks fsck on older platforms.
as for btrfs - you better try it yourself. Sometimes it fits well, sometimes redhat-enforced configurations with xfs+lvm suits better, sometimes it just doesn't worth the time - ext4 still "just works" for most common uses.
answered Mar 11 at 10:39
nonenone
1
1
add a comment |
add a comment |
From kernel document
metadata_csum and 64bit
Starting in early 2012, metadata checksums were added to all major ext4
and jbd2 data structures. The associated feature flag is metadata_csum.
The desired checksum algorithm is indicated in the superblock, though as
of October 2012 the only supported algorithm is crc32c. Some data
structures did not have space to fit a full 32-bit checksum, so only the
lower 16 bits are stored. Enabling the 64bit feature increases the data
structure size so that full 32-bit checksums can be stored for many data
structures. However, existing 32-bit filesystems cannot be extended to
enable 64bit mode, at least not without the experimental resize2fs
patches to do so.
Existing filesystems can have checksumming added by running
**tune2fs -O metadata_csum** against the underlying device. If tune2fs
encounters directory blocks that lack sufficient empty space to add a
checksum, it will request that you run **e2fsck -D** to have the
directories rebuilt with checksums. This has the added benefit of
removing slack space from the directory files and rebalancing the htree
indexes. If you _ignore_ this step, your directories will not be
protected by a checksum!
add a comment |
From kernel document
metadata_csum and 64bit
Starting in early 2012, metadata checksums were added to all major ext4
and jbd2 data structures. The associated feature flag is metadata_csum.
The desired checksum algorithm is indicated in the superblock, though as
of October 2012 the only supported algorithm is crc32c. Some data
structures did not have space to fit a full 32-bit checksum, so only the
lower 16 bits are stored. Enabling the 64bit feature increases the data
structure size so that full 32-bit checksums can be stored for many data
structures. However, existing 32-bit filesystems cannot be extended to
enable 64bit mode, at least not without the experimental resize2fs
patches to do so.
Existing filesystems can have checksumming added by running
**tune2fs -O metadata_csum** against the underlying device. If tune2fs
encounters directory blocks that lack sufficient empty space to add a
checksum, it will request that you run **e2fsck -D** to have the
directories rebuilt with checksums. This has the added benefit of
removing slack space from the directory files and rebalancing the htree
indexes. If you _ignore_ this step, your directories will not be
protected by a checksum!
add a comment |
From kernel document
metadata_csum and 64bit
Starting in early 2012, metadata checksums were added to all major ext4
and jbd2 data structures. The associated feature flag is metadata_csum.
The desired checksum algorithm is indicated in the superblock, though as
of October 2012 the only supported algorithm is crc32c. Some data
structures did not have space to fit a full 32-bit checksum, so only the
lower 16 bits are stored. Enabling the 64bit feature increases the data
structure size so that full 32-bit checksums can be stored for many data
structures. However, existing 32-bit filesystems cannot be extended to
enable 64bit mode, at least not without the experimental resize2fs
patches to do so.
Existing filesystems can have checksumming added by running
**tune2fs -O metadata_csum** against the underlying device. If tune2fs
encounters directory blocks that lack sufficient empty space to add a
checksum, it will request that you run **e2fsck -D** to have the
directories rebuilt with checksums. This has the added benefit of
removing slack space from the directory files and rebalancing the htree
indexes. If you _ignore_ this step, your directories will not be
protected by a checksum!
From kernel document
metadata_csum and 64bit
Starting in early 2012, metadata checksums were added to all major ext4
and jbd2 data structures. The associated feature flag is metadata_csum.
The desired checksum algorithm is indicated in the superblock, though as
of October 2012 the only supported algorithm is crc32c. Some data
structures did not have space to fit a full 32-bit checksum, so only the
lower 16 bits are stored. Enabling the 64bit feature increases the data
structure size so that full 32-bit checksums can be stored for many data
structures. However, existing 32-bit filesystems cannot be extended to
enable 64bit mode, at least not without the experimental resize2fs
patches to do so.
Existing filesystems can have checksumming added by running
**tune2fs -O metadata_csum** against the underlying device. If tune2fs
encounters directory blocks that lack sufficient empty space to add a
checksum, it will request that you run **e2fsck -D** to have the
directories rebuilt with checksums. This has the added benefit of
removing slack space from the directory files and rebalancing the htree
indexes. If you _ignore_ this step, your directories will not be
protected by a checksum!
answered May 4 at 9:47
asktyagiasktyagi
1176
1176
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f950704%2fmkfs-o-64bit-metadata-csum-t-ext4-in-2019%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Consider btrfs as dead or dying.
– Sven♦
Jan 25 at 8:06
@Sven Agreed. FWIW, BTRFS was developed by Oracle, IMO likely as a competitor to Sun's ZFS. Well, Oracle bought Sun and now owns ZFS. And Red Hat dropped support of BTRFS in August 2017.
– Andrew Henle
Jan 25 at 14:55