Unix & Linux Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of Linux, FreeBSD and other Un*x-like operating systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I tried looking at the difference, the main ones seem to be 4 supports more subdirectories in a file, supports larger files, has delayed write which I don't prefer as I don't want data loss. I also see timestamps are more accurate but it also mentions there is no support in glibc so no apps would use it. Also I just need it ot be as accurate as NTFS, I don't need anything more accurate.

I'm thinking I should go with ext3 because its more likely to be more stable. What should I look at when choosing between the two?

share|improve this question
ext3 v. ext4 is an easy question: ext4, at least as long as you have a semi-modern kernel (e.g., 2.6.30 or later, that's mid-2009). The harder question you should be asking is ext4 v. btrfs. – derobert Nov 1 '12 at 21:32
up vote 9 down vote accepted

These days ext4 is considered the stable standard, and you should use it. Also all filesystems use delayed writing, ext4 just delays allocating where the blocks go until they are actually written, which helps reduce fragmentation. It also uses extents to track the blocks, which makes it more efficient.

share|improve this answer
Except for the recent ext4 corruption problems – jordanm Nov 1 '12 at 23:14
@jordanm: already fixed: phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTIxODY – liori Nov 2 '12 at 0:16

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.