Did I format correct for Entware on Asus ac68u router? Ext2 vs Ext3 and Ext4

[MatrixGeeker]

I have a Asus ac68u ac1900 router and I formatted my usb ext2. I formatted 1 partition for "Entware" and 1 for "Ab solution" and another "data" is this the best option besides formatting it ext2 or ext4? should I reformat it?

Also should I just do 1 partition?

 

[thelonelycoder]

Just one partition, ext2 is the best choice. Entware and AB-Solution don't need separate partitions. The next major release will move all AB files into Entware anyway.
If you want to separate your other data, make that two partitions.

 

[MatrixGeeker]

Just one partition, ext2 is the best choice. Entware and AB-Solution don't need separate partitions. The next major release will move all AB files into Entware anyway.
If you want to separate your other data, make that two partitions.

im going with ext4 which i read is better

 

[M@rco]

ext2 is the best choice

Why would you prefer ext2 over ext3 or ext4? I'm currently having my usb drive partitioned with ext2 as well, but I often get messages regarding the drive and need to run e2fsck regularly. A replacement drive, USB 3.0 16Gb, will be in tomorrow and I was actually considering to go for ext4, because of the journaling fs and it seems, on average, it has better r/w speeds as well. Just curious why many forum members still prefer ext2 over newer filesystems like ext4?

 

[thelonelycoder]

For a stick/thumb drive, go with ext2 for reasons explained about 10 times at every gathering of experts around here.
For drives, ext4 really is the choice. I am no expert, I can only draw conclusions from my own and others experiences.

I draw a line here and let a few search links speak. These discussions never seem to come to a universally aplicable conclusion, so I end my input here.
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/ext2-ext3-ext4-or-ntfs-for-usb-stick-disk.31621/
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=1875.0
https://www.linuxquestions.org/ques...-usb-is-ext2-better-for-health-of-usb-731510/
https://forum.lede-project.org/t/ext2-or-ext4-for-thumb-drive/2473/5

 

[Clark Griswald]

I use ext2 on my USB3 thumb drive, because that is what thelonelycoder highly recommends on the AB-Solution requirements section.

The only problem I have experienced, is waiting for v4 to be released from inside his four walls

 

[thelonelycoder]

I use ext2 on my USB3 thumb drive, because that is what thelonelycoder highly recommends on the AB-Solution requirements section.

The only problem I have experienced, is waiting for v4 to be released from inside his four walls

I'm sorry to hear about your problem. I'm looking at these walls right now and can tell you with a certain amount of confidence that only time will fix it.

 

[MatrixGeeker]

Well does anybody know how to format to EXT 4 on a windows? Software I was using only foes to Ext3

nevermind i figured it out

 

[MatrixGeeker]

Should I make it logical or primary?

 

[M@rco]

For a stick/thumb drive, go with ext2 for reasons explained about 10 times at every gathering of experts around here.
For drives, ext4 really is the choice. I am no expert, I can only draw conclusions from my own and others experiences.

I draw a line here and let a few search links speak. These discussions never seem to come to a universally aplicable conclusion, so I end my input here.
https://www.snbforums.com/threads/ext2-ext3-ext4-or-ntfs-for-usb-stick-disk.31621/
http://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php?topic=1875.0
https://www.linuxquestions.org/ques...-usb-is-ext2-better-for-health-of-usb-731510/
https://forum.lede-project.org/t/ext2-or-ext4-for-thumb-drive/2473/5

I was in no way attempting to lure you in a never ending discussion, just curious to your thoughts because I value your opinion very much. Maybe I search for the wrong keywords, but on the forum short words as ext2 and usb just don't give any results. When searching at Google you'll find mostly comparison on HDD performance, which makes sense, so thanks for posting these links. In the first link you shared is a link to another thread, and this oneliner seems to say it all:

ext2 is best for USB flash drives (the journalling from ext3/ext4 would slow down performance on a flash drive)

I will do some benchmarking to verify whether that's still the case, as this comment by @RMerlin was made nearly 2 years ago and I guess things could have changed due to ongoing development (?). Let's see if there's some basic benchmarking tool in the entware-ng repo. Also the current usb drive is an USB 2.0 drive and the replacement is an USB 3.0 drive, so let's see if the drop in performance is noticable.

Main reason for me to switch, if I'd actually go for ext4, is that I keep getting messages like

EXT2-fs (sda1) warning: maximal mount count reached, running e2fsck is recommended

and

EXT2-fs (sda1): warning: mounting unchecked fs, running e2fsck is recommended

even though filesystems are checked on every (re-)boot using this script found in the wiki and I never, ever just 'pull the plug'.
It's loglines like these that slow down my performance .

 

[ColinTaylor]

Main reason for me to switch, if I'd actually go for ext4, is that I keep getting messages like

EXT2-fs (sda1) warning: maximal mount count reached, running e2fsck is recommended

Use the following command to see what the Maximum mount count is set to. Maybe it's set to something stupid like 1. If you set it to -1 the message should never appear.

# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              73
Maximum mount count:      -1

 

[thelonelycoder]

I was in no way attempting to lure you in a never ending discussion, just curious to your thoughts because I value your opinion very much. Maybe I search for the wrong keywords, but on the forum short words as ext2 and usb just don't give any results. When searching at Google you'll find mostly comparison on HDD performance, which makes sense, so thanks for posting these links.

I should not comment or reply to these threads, lacking the technical knowledge to give qualified answers. I can only repeat my own observations with the devices I have on hand (many...) and voice my opinion on my conclusions.
If anyone does or has found a comprehensive test report that answers this questions conclusively then I am more than happy to include it in the AB FAQ or anytime the ext??? question comes up.

Use the following command to see what the Maximum mount count is set to. Maybe it's set to something stupid like 1. If you set it to -1 the message should never appear.

Interesting, what value is that, I have this from a random router:

user@RT-AC1900P:/tmp/home/root# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              35
Maximum mount count:      31

 

[ColinTaylor]

Interesting, what value is that, I have this from a random router:

user@RT-AC1900P:/tmp/home/root# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              35
Maximum mount count:      31

I got that from my RT-AC68U running John's fork. I can't be sure but I probably used the router itself to format the partition (ext4).

This is what I get from my Centos server:

# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              3
Maximum mount count:      39

 

[M@rco]

I should not comment or reply to these threads, lacking the technical knowledge to give qualified answers. I can only repeat my own observations with the devices I have on hand (many...) and voice my opinion on my conclusions.

I'm glad you did, I did learn something from it

Use the following command to see what the Maximum mount count is set to. Maybe it's set to something stupid like 1. If you set it to -1 the message should never appear.

Thanks for the tip. I guess it's set to 20 by default, as I've never changed it?

marco@RT-AC68U:/tmp/home/root# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              1
Maximum mount count:      20
marco@RT-AC68U:/tmp/home/root#

 

[MatrixGeeker]

I'm glad you did, I did learn something from it



Thanks for the tip. I guess it's set to 20 by default, as I've never changed it?

marco@RT-AC68U:/tmp/home/root# tune2fs -l /dev/sda1 | grep -i "mount count"
Mount count:              1
Maximum mount count:      20
marco@RT-AC68U:/tmp/home/root#

what does this mean? ext4 is better

seems like ext 2 was thing but now asus support ext4 is better

 

[M@rco]

what does this mean? ext4 is better

seems like ext 2 was thing but now asus support ext4 is better

'Better' depends on several factors. You could be right, but maybe you missed the info I quoted from a post from @RMerlin (you know, the developer of Asuswrt-Merlin ) :

In general:

ext4 is best for HDD (or ext3 if your router does not support it )
ext2 is best for USB flash drives (the journalling from ext3/ext4 would slow down performance on a flash drive)

As mentioned above, I don't know whether ext4 still slows down performance due to it's journalling, as development hasn't stopped in the meantime. That's something that should be benchmarked. But if Eric makes a statement like that, he does (did) it for a reason.

I'll have to see whether I can benchmark it somehow, haven't found a tool yet in in the entware-ng repository (maybe @ryzhov_al has a suggestion?) but if I can't, I'll stick with the veterans consensus that ext2 is the way to go. Keep in mind that we're using flash drives, not HDDs so basically every search result on Google about ext2 vs ext4 performance doesn't reflect how it performs on the media and architecture which we are using.

 

[sfx2000]

As mentioned above, I don't know whether ext4 still slows down performance due to it's journalling, as development hasn't stopped in the meantime. That's something that should be benchmarked. But if Eric makes a statement like that, he does (did) it for a reason.

Older USB drives - ext2 makes sense as it's a bit more flash friendly...

Newer drives, esp. from quality vendors like SanDisk and the like, ext4 isn't as much of a problem - esp. as flash gets more robust, and we see firmware improvements in the FTL.

Really depends on the use cases - if one is mostly read, it doesn't really matter - if there's a lot of write activity, maybe ext2... even with ext4, one can disable the journal if needed.

 

[M@rco]

If you set it to -1 the message should never appear.

For anyone who wants to know, to change the maximum mount count, do

tune2fs -c -1 /dev/sda1

Replace /dev/sda1 in the example above with the partition of your choice. After executing tune2fs shows a confirmation:

tune2fs 1.42.13 (17-May-2015)
Setting maximal mount count to -1

Thanks to @ColinTaylor for the tip!