ext3

The ext3 or third extended filesystem is a journalled file system that is commonly used by the Linux operating system. It is the default file system for many popular Linux distributions. Stephen Tweedie first revealed that he was working on extending ext2 in a February 1999 kernel mailing list posting and the filesystem was merged with the mainline kernel from 2.4.15 onward.


Advantages

Although its performance (speed) is less attractive than competing linux filesystems such as JFS, ReiserFS and XFS, it does have the significant advantage that it allows in-place upgrades from the ext2 file system without having to back up and restore data as well as requiring lower CPU consumption than ReiserFS and XFS.[4]

The ext3 file system adds, over its predecessor:

* A journal
* Online file system growth

Without these, any ext3 file system is also a valid ext2 file system. This has allowed well-tested and mature file system maintenance utilities for maintaining and repairing ext2 file systems to also be used with ext3 without major changes. The ext2 and ext3 file systems share the same standard set of utilities, e2fsprogs, which includes a fsck tool. The close relationship also makes conversion between the two file systems (both forward to ext3 and backward to ext2) straightforward.

There are three levels of journaling available in the Linux implementation of ext3:

Journal (lowest risk)

Both metadata and file contents are written to the journal before being committed to the main file system. Because the journal is relatively continuous on disk, this can improve performance in some circumstances. In other cases, performance gets worse because the data must be written twice - once to the journal, and once to the main part of the filesystem.

Ordered (medium risk)

Only metadata is journaled; file contents are not, but it's guaranteed that file contents are written to disk before associated metadata is marked as committed in the journal. This is the default on many Linux distributions. If there is a power outage or kernel panic while a file is being written or appended to, the journal will indicate the new file or appended data has not been "committed", so it will be purged by the cleanup process. (This appends and new files have the same level of integrity protection as the "journaled" level.) However, files being overwritten can be corrupted because the original version of the file is not stored. Thus it's possible to end up with a file in an intermediate state between new and old, without enough information to restore either one or the other (the new data never made it to disk completely, and the old data is not stored anywhere). Even worse, the intermediate state might intersperse old and new data, because the order of the write is left up to the disk's hardware.

Writeback (highest risk)

Only metadata is journaled; file contents are not. The contents might be written before or after the journal is updated. As a result, files modified right before a crash can become corrupted. For example, a file being appended to may be marked in the journal as being larger than it actually is, causing garbage at the end. Older versions of files could also appear unexpected after a journal recovery. The lack of syncronicity between data and journal is faster in many cases. XFS,and JFS use this level of journaling, but ensures that any "garbage" due to unwritten data is zeroed out on reboot.

While in some contexts the lack of "modern" filesystem features such as dynamic inode allocation and extents could be considered a disadvantage, in terms of recoverability this gives ext3 a significant advantage over file systems with those features. The file system metadata is all in fixed, well-known locations, and there is some redundancy inherent in the data structures that may allow ext2 and ext3 to be recoverable in the face of significant data corruption, where tree-based file systems may not be recoverable.

Disadvantages

Functionality

Since ext3 aims at being mostly compatible with ext2, many of the on-disk structures are similar to those of ext2. Because of that, ext3 lacks a number of features of more recent designs, such as dynamic allocation of i-nodes and variable block sizes (frags or tails).

ext3 filesystems cannot be fscked while the filesystem is mounted for writing. A dump of the filesystem taken while it is mounted read-write may result in corrupt data within the dump file.

ext3 does not support extents, a feature found in other filesystems such as JFS, ext4 and XFS.

Defragmentation

There is no online ext3 defragmentation tool working on the filesystem level. An offline ext2 defragmenter, e2defrag, exists but requires that the ext3 filesystem be converted back to ext2 first. But depending on the feature bits turned on the filesystem, e2defrag may destroy data; it does not know how to treat many of the newer ext3 features.

There are userspace defragmentation tools like Shake and defrag, which work by copying each file and hoping the newly allocated file was not fragmented. However this only works if the filesystem is reasonably empty, and such filesystems are not usually fragmented. A true defragmentation tool does not exist for ext3.

However, as the Linux System Administrator Guide states, "Modern Linux filesystem(s) keep fragmentation at a minimum by keeping all blocks in a file close together, even if they can't be stored in consecutive sectors. Some filesystems, like ext3, effectively allocate the free block that is nearest to other blocks in a file. Therefore it is not necessary to worry about fragmentation in a Linux system."

Undeletion

Unlike ext2, ext3 zeroes out block pointers in the inodes of deleted files. It does this to simplify read-write access to the filesystem when the journal is being replayed after an unclean mount. This, however, effectively prevents files from being undeleted. The user's only recourse is to grep the hard drive for data known to signal the start and end of the file. This provides slightly more secure deletion than ext2, which can be either an advantage or a disadvantage.

Compression

Support for transparent compression (available as an unofficial patch for ext2) is not available in ext3.

No checksumming in journal

Ext3 does not do checksumming when writing to the journal. If barrier=1 is not enabled as a mount option (in /etc/fstab), and if the hardware is doing out-of-order write caching, one runs the risk of severe filesystem corruption during a crash. (This option is not enabled by default on almost all popular Linux distributions, and thus most distributions are at risk.)

Consider the following scenario: If hard disk writes are done out-of-order (due to modern hard disks caching writes in order to amortize write speeds), it is likely that one will write a commit block of a transaction before the other relevant blocks are written. If a power failure or kernel panic should occur before the other blocks get written, the system will have to be rebooted. Upon reboot, the file system will replay the log as normal, and replay the "winners" (transactions with a commit block, including the invalid transaction above which happened to be tagged with a valid commit block). The unfinished disk write above will thus proceed, but using corrupt journal data. The file system will thus mistakenly overwrite normal data with corrupt data while replaying the journal. If checksums had been used (if the blocks of the "fake winner" transaction were tagged with mutual checksum), the file system could have known better and not replayed the corrupt data onto the disk. As of June 24, 2007, a patch is in the works to fix this problem.