On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 04:01:16PM +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: > > BTW: Is there any (real) advantage to recreate the FS using the ext4's flex_bg instead of converting the ext3 to ext4 and using ext3 uninit_bg ? > It speeds up e2fsck times, and it allows for more contiguous free space in the file system. So yes, there is an advantage to using a native ext4 file system --- but of course that's a pain in the tuckus for people with large RAID arrays. Which also explains why we were mainly seeing this bug reported with people using large RAID devices; those are the people who are most likely to want to do an upgrade-in-place, because it's too painful to recreate and then copy the data. Which is fine; one of the major features of ext4 is to be able to support upgrades-in-place from ext3. Unfortunately, while I had native (unconverted) ext3 file systems in my test matrix, I didn't have converted ext3 file system formats in my regular regression test suite script. That is going to be fixed shortly.... - Ted -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
