Qestion About Class/speed Of 32 Gb Sd Cards At Gbax

[Squidge]

This is Linux so why not use ext3?
Probably due to the fact that people may want to connect it to PCs which do not run Linux, such as MacOS and Windows?Why?Due to the fact that not everyone in the world runs Linux, and, as chip says, FAT is the standard for removable media. Put ext3 on your cards if you want, but the default will always be FAT.

 

[sterling976]

Personally, I'll probably have a number of SD cards, some of which are formatted with FAT32, some of which are formatted ext. I'll probably store data files (video, music, and ROMs) on a FAT32-formatted card so I can also use them in my Windows Mobile phone. I'll probably use ext2 or ext3 for any emulators or other programs that make more sense natively under a linux-friendly filesystem.

Not that anyone besides me particularly cares how I format my storage media. My point is, there are any number of ways to format your SD card(s). It's your system, you can do what you want with it, regardless of anyone else's preference. Explore and enjoy.

Getting back on topic, can anyone confirm the class/manufacturer of the cards for sale at GBAX? The best answer I saw in this thread was 'Probably class 4, because that's what SanDisk makes," but there was a question raised as to whether GBAX is selling SanDisk cards or some other manufacturer:

most likely class 4, as that is what sandisk makes for stable and long-lasting cards right now

Thanks for the quick response, if that is the case I'll most likely be picking up at least one for the new unit. Do we have any confirmation that GBAX is actually shipping Sandisk Cards? I know it was one shown on the site, but It looked like stock photo (e.g. Generic SD).

 

[AireTamStorm]

Due to the fact that not everyone in the world runs Linux, and, as chip says, FAT is the standard for removable media. Put ext3 on your cards if you want, but the default will always be FAT.
But even still, for the Pandora a non-FAT32 Filesystem would probably be the way to go in most cases. Even if the filesystem isn't readable by Windows, it doesn't have to be. We have things like Samba , NFS and FTP for that purpose. If anyone actually wants to do a Union mount (like has been discussed many times before) they're not going to want to do it on FAT32, since filesystem-level ACLs do not exist on FAT32. I've tried mounting a FAT32 partition to /home/username before and it just doesn't work with Gnome or KDE.

Regardless of the wide support, it is probably better practice to go with EXT3 and just install the EXT3 driver on your windows boxes. Just because it works for everyone doesn't necessarily mean it is the best solution. Linux should run using Linux filesystems.

 

[adamorjames]

+1 for ext3 being the default.

Also to add something useful to this topic:
Speed of different classes - http://www.sdcard.org/developers/tech/speed_class/

EDIT: I guess ext2 is cool also, just please not FAT32.
EDIT: Hello SteveM. By the word "default" I actually meant "default recommendation" in guides and such. My opinion is based on the fact that FAT32 is very limiting to Linux and I have been using ext3 for over a year.

 

[Tor]

Why ext3? ext2 is faster and makes at least as much sense on an SD card. Do you believe you will need that journal that ext3 adds?

 

[cosam]

+1 for EXT3 being the default.

The default what? We're talking about SD cards here, not something that's included with the Pandora as standard. Maybe you mean the fstab entry for the SD cards? With any luck that will be set to auto, so it won't matter what filesystem you have on your cards.

As much as I like ext3, journaling filesystems will wear your card out faster. Yes, there's wear leveling, but the total number of writes (and thus wear) is the same whichever blocks you use. Ext2 (with the noatime option) would be a better choice if you care about card longevity.

 

[cools]

XFS for default

Seriously, if you're booting up a different OS - use what you want, you've gone beyond using the card as removable media. Remember that the Pandora will be booting from NAND by default. I'd be willing to bet the SD slots will be automounted into /mnt/card1 /mnt/card2 or similar. Hell, depending on how the OS is setup I'd not be surprised if it simply scanned the cards upon insertion and added items into a GUI menu automatically (PXML, remember?).

FAT is perfect for removable media. It works on everything.

As for the question regarding the Pandora appearing as a USB flash drive... You mean like the Zaurus? The Z has a FAT partition specifically for this.

 

[canguy247]

As much as I like ext3, journaling filesystems will wear your card out faster. Yes, there's wear leveling, but the total number of writes (and thus wear) is the same whichever blocks you use. Ext2 (with the noatime option) would be a better choice if you care about card longevity.

Definitely true. But I have been using ext3 and a SWAP partition on sd cards for years. You will definitely upgrade the card long before you get very many errors (unless you have a bum card or use really crap manufacturers.) My 4gb card, which is getting small by todays standards has a 256mb swap partition on a debian system with 64mb of ram. Still no issues. 10000-100000 write cycles with wear leveling combine for a very good lifespan on these cards.

 

[hedwards]

??? Where did you get that from? I have followed the development of ext2 and ext3 since the beginning, and it's been compatible all the way except for a tiny change many many years ago which was easily handled. I have ext2 filesystems more than a decade old and they are 100% functional on the newest systems I have.

Ext3 is basically just ext2 with journaling slapped on, and there's been discussion of if this just adds unneccessary wear&tear for a card. Don't know the reality of that, but I think the consensus is that it's better to just go with ext2.

That's probably because you're using Linux and some of us aren't. I've always had stability issues when trying to access ext2 and as of now I don't think I've ever managed to mount ext3. Mainly because the spec does change, whether you can read old filesystems is really beside the point, the point is that I can't count on reading a particular revision because it does change and it does have stability issues on non-Linux systems.

That and NTFS is more or less the filesystem of interoperability at this point. It runs by default on the vast majority of computers and is pretty easy to get running on most other ones. I'm really not sure how a Linux centric filesystem is going to beat that. Same goes for UFS2, it's a great filesystem but not appropriate for a device like this.

Choosing a filesystem that doesn't properly interoperate is really counter my understanding of the point of this device.

 

[Tor]

@hedwards:
You're correct - I meant ext2 filesystems in a Linux context. I'm not familiar with the quality of the ext2 support for Windows. In any case I totally agree that for cards that you intend to interchange with other computers it's much better to stick with FAT. These cards will typically be data cards anyway (photos, video, documents etc.) and my only objection to FAT on a card is for a Linux installation on a card (Linux-executable programs), for which ext2 would be better (there's not much reason to share the cards with non-Linux systems).