which file system for sd card?

Fernando Martins fernando at cmartins.nl
Sun Jan 25 15:15:53 CET 2009

Pietro "m0nt0" Montorfano wrote:
> William Kenworthy ha scritto:
>> I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
>> however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
>> Using it for OSM maps
>> BillK
> IMHO the best fs for sd is vfat if you don't care about permission, so 
> if you have to put your photos or docs on it, else ext2 is BETTER than 
> ext3 in this case for a simple reason, it doesn't have the journal.
> Not having the journal imlies a redouced number of write to sd and a 
> reduced probability to get the data lost.
I'm not sure I follow your logic favoring ext2. The point of ext3 
journal is exactly to control for errors. Even if you get globally more 
chance of errors with ext3, you should only consider the errors in the 
journal. I mean, a write to ext2 is equivalent to a write in ext3's 
journal, since from here, ext3 guarantees no errors in the fs, even if 
takes more tries to update it. So, if the transfer from the journal to 
the fs itself is guaranteed, then the comparison should be between ext2 
and the ext3's journal, right?

Anyway, I'm also inclined for FAT, mostly for the simplicity (thus "less 
susceptibility to corruption") and universality of the fs. I'm just left 
wondering about performance, in particular as a storage for maps.


More information about the community mailing list