Database Users

[Q]database read/write speed

Hi all,
I was doing some test with a friend of mine that have a galaxy s with ext4 lag fix.
We have noticed that in quadrant there is a huge different in time during the passages "writing database" and "reading database".
So is the desire hd filesisten not well optimized (not like the original galaxy s one ) and is there a way to speed up read/write operations?
Thank u all
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App

by default the galaxy S out of the box uses RFS which when doing IO to DB can be very very slow....because it does a lot of journalling.
I believe ext4 does not do journalling?? correct me if i am wrong...
if your friend uses the OCLF then ...believe me over a period of 1 week..or after your friend has put more than 10 apps...it will start to degrade...
RFS in the GS corrupts the FS over time...
I have had my DHD for like 2 weeks and installed over 50 apps..
quadrant scores are always...close to 2000..
using Froyo on the GS without any lag fix u get approx 1000 quadrant score..
with lag fix you get close to 2000..but then again is temporary..
if your friend had applied the voodoo lag fix..then i thing that uses a different journalling policy.and on Froyo GS gets approx around the 1500...
so DHD is indeed optimize IMO

I came from the galaxy s. Wich i loved, after much work and tweaking. Straight out of the box it was useless. But back to topic. Of course it would be possible but i dont really see the need. Itryed all the diffrent lagfixes for SGS, OCLF wich uses EXT2, Voodoo EXT4, and Ztupys kernel with ddiferent options and on Android 2.1 they aall really boosted the Quadrant scores was getting 2200+. But on Android 2.2 it didnt have same effect quadrant about 1500-1700 still good fix. But when i run Quadrant on DHD, in I/O section it stops a little while r/w data but it did that with lagfix on SGS also. Only lagfix that made it run thru with out pauseing was OCLF wich uses EXT2, and Ext2 gets corrupted or something after a while and performance slows down.
I think we have a good stable device and i dont see the need.

nandihno said:
I believe ext4 does not do journalling?? correct me if i am wrong...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am afraid not, ext4 is basically ext3 with journalling c.f Wikipedia

thank u all for replies. Mine was just curiosity more than need because DHD in every day use is really fast and responsive (not like my old iphone 3g....)
I think i has applied the OCLF so it will be degraded in some times, and he said also that he reboot the phone once a day..
Sorry to mod if i posted in the wrong section
muffy

Desire performance hack

http://www.xda-developers.com/android/new-hack-for-desire-and-nexus-one-data2ext/
Would this work on our phone? It greatly increases performance, and someone is porting it to the nexus one.
heres a link to the script : http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=859419

homewmt said:
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/new-hack-for-desire-and-nexus-one-data2ext/
Would this work on our phone? It greatly increases performance, and someone is porting it to the nexus one.
heres a link to the script : http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=859419
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I only took a quick look but it seems as they are just using an ext partition on sd card in place of the data partition. That is what we did with Dual Rom. We used system and data partitions of the phone, one for each rom. Then both roms used and ext partition of sd for the data partitions. We did see benchmarks about 25% higher with that method. I hit as high as 617 quad score with a Froyshedyo. Average was around 590-600. But again these are benchmark scores so take them for what they are worth. I ran the rom for an extended period of time and also have gone back and forth and I can't say that I really see a 25% increase in performance that the benchmarks showed.
Then again maybe i read the links wrong and this is completely different lol.

I think this is just creating a buffer for the I/O using a SD partition. It was done a while ago I think on a galaxy phone I believe... I don't know. I mentioned it a long time ago but I think the consensus was that it wouldn't do much for us.

If anyway could give a straight answer on this it would be fantastic. (not being sarcastic towards the other replies. those are greatly appreciated as well)
I'm pretty curious about this though. Does anyone know if this would actually cause a significant increase in noticeable performance for us? And if so would this be possible?

From what I read about it last night it basically only improves the Quadrant scores, and doesn't do anything really noticeable for performance.
Don't take my word for it though, I could be wrong, thats just what I found from the small bit of research I did.

ToastPwnz said:
From what I read about it last night it basically only improves the Quadrant scores, and doesn't do anything really noticeable for performance.
Don't take my word for it though, I could be wrong, thats just what I found from the small bit of research I did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah that's pretty much all I can really find too. That it increases quadrant scores. Particularly the I/O score. But i don't have enough knowledge on this stuff to know what exactly that would do to the phone's performance overall.

I recall someone saying that all it really did was "give Quadrant what it wanted", so basically does nothing more then increase your scores.
Sounds pretty useless to me. >.>

I've had this on my Moment for awhile, Samdroid developed this for the Galaxy spica, which is the GSM version of the Moment. SDX ported it to the Moment, and while yes it does give better quadrant scores, it does increase performance. It did help out a lot even more when Samsung and Sprint just abandoned the phone completely. For phones with older and slower hardware, you'll notice a difference. But with phones with Snapdragon or faster, you won't notice it too much.

Is that true or fake ? nexus s is 6x faster than galaxy s

Please read that carefuly
I read the next comment in gsmarena under nexus s section :
[nexus s is using ext3 on their system files which make 3x faster on ext4, 6x faster than RFS system (samsung galaxy s have RFS file system if you don't know it)and 3x times less power consumption than both. with that it is much better than a phone using dual core for speed and power consumption who's using an RFS or a EXT4. not all android phone are using ext even with the same version, a "smart" phone is useless if you can only use it in a few hours. With that reason nexus s is worth to buy as a "smart phone"
I want to know is that true? is that accurate information?
Can i change file system on galaxy s from RFS to ext3 ?
how ext3 is better than ext4?

You can change the fs. Or wait for gingerbread S port.

It's all software, hardware is pretty much the same... So, SGS can probably be as fast as NS.

And while a file system may be more power efficient than another, it only plays a tiny part in the power consumption of your phone - and none at all when it is not used like when browsing the web or playing a game!
So the speed side is correct (this is the 'lag' - and I agree that lag is not fixed by dual core processors). But the power side is not. Not having lag means you are finished faster, and less time equals less battery usage. That is all there is to it. Do more in that day and your battery will last even shorter (but you have done more!).

6x about what? overall? I/O? Not even a benchmark attached, maybe the dear old maybe-faulty-maybe-not Quadrant?

It's fake. Nexus S is runing on YAFFS and ext4, just like Galaxy S running on voodoo

Its probably complete crap.. Depends what work load they used for testing too. Most the monkeys who write that stuff never tested it. Also, we don't have enough information about the lag problem to know why the stalls happen. But the latest unofficial firmware seems to have been greatly optimized

thanks all bayerischbeer , jutezak, Rawat and Auzy for your answers
Stefanauss sorry i don't understand your answer coze my english is not good
but still noone answered this Q : how ext3 is better than ext4?

xname2004 said:
thanks all bayerischbeer , jutezak, Rawat and Auzy for your answers
Stefanauss sorry i don't understand your answer coze my english is not good
but still noone answered this Q : how ext3 is better than ext4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ext4 is slightly faster than 3 but this is marginal. Ext4 serves a better purpose on journaling millions of files on insane storage (TBs).

What's the big deal about EXT4?

Ok can someone explain the difference between EXT4 and the regular software the I'm running..... right now I'm using roto jmi firmware version 2, my tab feels fast, quadrant score of 1006 but I hear everyone saying converting to EXT4 will make it that much faster......
......basically is it worth me doing it?
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

EXT4 is a filesystem, not software. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4
Its faster than the rfs filesystem the galaxy tab uses by default because of the way it manages **** writes.
So yeah, if you experience random lagging, this will fix it and should make it generally more fluid

KingofXings said:
Ok can someone explain the difference between EXT4 and the regular software the I'm running..... right now I'm using roto jmi firmware version 2, my tab feels fast, quadrant score of 1006 but I hear everyone saying converting to EXT4 will make it that much faster......
......basically is it worth me doing it?
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Personally, I think you see more performance gains going from stock to a JMI ROM, than you will going to EXT4 from RFS on a JMI ROM.
Yes, quadrant appears much faster, but in real world usage there isn't as much difference.
So my advice is, if you're happy with what you've got, leave it alone for now.
Regards,
Dave

I disagree, I ran on a JMI rom with the original file system for about 2 weeks and then upgraded to EXT4 and I definitely noticed a speed improvement. Well worth the conversion since it only took about 10 minutes and went very smoothly.

this is my point exactly, my tab runs smooths, feels fast enough so i wonder how much faster can EXT4 make it??
i suppose theres a part of me inside thats never satisfied and even knowing that there is a possibility that i could potentially make my tab faster makes me wanna switch to EXT4.....
but i have 3 questions..
1) what does quadrant scores actually mean in real life?
2) does using EXT4 over the standard RFS effect or improve battery life?
3) and will samsung revert back to RFS if i ever decided to change roms?

KingofXings said:
this is my point exactly, my tab runs smooths, feels fast enough so i wonder how much faster can EXT4 make it??
i suppose theres a part of me inside thats never satisfied and even knowing that there is a possibility that i could potentially make my tab faster makes me wanna switch to EXT4.....
but i have 3 questions..
1) what does quadrant scores actually mean in real life?
2) does using EXT4 over the standard RFS effect or improve battery life?
3) and will samsung revert back to RFS if i ever decided to change roms?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my experience, converting to EXT4 (first) made a remarkable improvement even on the stock ROM, then installing the Overcome ROM was icing on the cake.
1) quadrant scores don't mean squat (IMHO)
2) possibly -- due to more efficient I/O
3) doesn't matter -- once you do change ROMs, you will never go back to any "Samsung" (oem) ROM.

gwbard said:
In my experience, converting to EXT4 (first) made a remarkable improvement even on the stock ROM, then installing the Overcome ROM was icing on the cake.
1) quadrant scores don't mean squat (IMHO)
2) possibly -- due to more efficient I/O
3) doesn't matter -- once you do change ROMs, you will never go back to any "Samsung" (oem) ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok ur making me wanna make the switch but does it matter that my tab is already running the roto jmi firmwire v2 b4 i make the conversion to EXT4?
plus is overcome that much more better suited to EXT4 than roto jmi?

KingofXings said:
ok ur making me wanna make the switch but does it matter that my tab is already running the roto jmi firmwire v2 b4 i make the conversion to EXT4?
plus is overcome that much more better suited to EXT4 than roto jmi?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't really answer about Roto's for sure -- I started with the stock (JJB) ROM and first applied MoDaCo's r3 kernel
(+ext4 conversion +clockwork recovery).
The MoDaCo conversion was very easy & I rebooted back to the stock ROM with no problem -- then flashed Overcome via CWM a day or so later.
The Overcome (and MoDaCo) ROMs were meant for EXT4 specifically -- not sure about Roto's, maybe someone else can answer that. If I were you I would have the Overcome zip ready to go on the sdcard, so you can easily get back to CWM and flash it if Roto's doesn't work out.

If I switch to EXT4, will this cause a compatibility problem with my PC which runs windows vista? More specifically, can my windows vista laptop read the EXT4 formatted microSD in my gtab ?

Converting to EXT4 only converts the OS partition. It does nothing to your SD cards, which I believe are in the FAT32 file system.

....So while we are talking about EXT4...Has anyone considered EXT4 on android with consideration of read/write cycles?
Some background: I've had several netbook and still have a dell mini 9. They have always run linux (specifically fedora). All have had SSDs. SSD have (and I guess newer SSDs still have) and number of read/write cycles that are finite (before you should expect failure). This is somewhat like the mean time to failure for spinny/mechnical HDs.
There was mild concern in the netbook forums that journalling filesystems would 'encourage' premature failure of SSDs. By 'premature', I mean happen sooner than expected as journalling FSs do all sorts of read/writes for the journal maintenance....For many, my self included, it was felt that this is not a huge issue as the number of read/writes was pretty big and that you would 'grow out' of the device before the time it takes to get to the number (or the device is obsoluted).
So, SSDs are flashed based. Is the android file system devices like an SSD? No idea and I think not. I bet many internal android storage devices, including SGT's, are flash based. I suspect the read/write cycles are a characteristice of flash memory and not an SSD thing.
So are journalling filesystems (specifically ext4) a concern on andorid for this reason? For me, probably not (i'll want something new in a year anyway...)
FWIW: ext4 and probably other journalling FSs have a way to turn off the journal features. The idea is that you'd get the other good stuff of ext4, but not the excessive read/writes (i.e. wear and tear on HD or SSD). Some netbookers, opted to do this while using EXT4; I never did. I wonder if the android ext4 'stuff' has this on or off?

Well, the Samsung RFS stands for Robust FAT File System, and it is basically FAT with Journaling slapped on top for protection, so I am guessing the journaling isn't too big a problem
But, this is exactly where the problems with RFS come in, it is a rather slapped together filesystem, and the drivers are none too great either. Whereas, EXT4 is a filesystem made for linux, and all the drivers etc are a heck of a lot better.
To the OP, the major benefits come in when writing files, such as installing programs etc, which is a LOT quicker. One of the main problems with the RFS setup is it takes comparatively forever to sync/write each file to the flash because of the slapped on journaling on a filesystem not really meant for it. There is a slight increase in speed/responsiveness all around because of the more efficient I/O, but yeah that is the major benefit.
Personally, I have gone to Overcome's v1.2.0 rom and kernel, ext4 filesystem etc, and will not be looking back. I also have the good fortune of being in a household with 2 tabs, the other being my father's which he does not want to even root let alone flash, so I will be doing a video comparison between stock and mine in the next few days, for all those interested in seeing the benefits compared to stock.

Best Lagfix for SGS Android 2.3.3/2.3.4

What is Best Lagfix for SGS Android 2.3.3/2.3.4

I dont think you need lagfix anymore on 2.3.3 and 2.3.4. It is already fast, smooth and stable. Though there are some bugs that are not related to lags

Modern lagfixes are mostly just kernels supporting an ext-4 conversion - they all will do more or less the same job. Pick one you like the features of, install and convert.
However as has been mentioned lag has been reduced a lot without it so the improvement is a lot less noticeable than it used to be.

since the GB roms there is no real need for "lagfix"
If you want you can still convert to ext4, just flash any kernel supporting it

Actually there is no noticeable difference between ext4 and rfs fs on gb roms in terms of UI smoothness and speed. And yeah I am using ext4 right now so that is just my personal observation.

jbdroid said:
Actually there is no noticeable difference between ext4 and rfs fs on gb roms in terms of UI smoothness and speed. And yeah I am using ext4 right now so that is just my personal observation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I second this. Lately I've just been using RFS, and I feel it's just as fast as when I ran ext4.

EXT 4 Voodoo lagfix

ext4 rules!
I think ext4 conversion still matters.
I use feedR to follow my google reader feeds. With rfs I can't open posts smoothly and fast as it is with ext4. Actually with rfs it's annoyingly laggy that I can't catch up with all the posts in the feeds.

I'm using feedr to follow 15 websites with rfs, and there is no problem with smoothness or feeds.
Sent from HAL-I9000 using Tapatalk

between rfs n ext4, in GB , yes they r not laggy.
but , how about battery consumption? rfs or ext4 that use alot of battery?

syamsoul said:
between rfs n ext4, in GB , yes they r not laggy.
but , how about battery consumption? rfs or ext4 that use alot of battery?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didnt notice any difference in battery consumption. RFS or EXT4, i usually get 2-3 days of mild usage, 1-2 days of heavy usage, on both.

K0v4L said:
I'm using feedr to follow 15 websites with rfs, and there is no problem with smoothness or feeds.
Sent from HAL-I9000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try opening post one after other immediately.

i've been on ext4 ever since eclair, never complained. I keep it like this

Try voodoo lagfix,but on gingerbread i think you don't have to use any lagfix.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Well, my JVH lags as hell...

I don't think you will notice any real difference with different lagfixes. I tried most types and didn't even notice real difference with rfs.
Most devs think ext4 is better so I do apply a lagfix, but not really sure why (better quadrant score? doesn't say anything but still)

I used couple of ROMs from XDA (F1, F1 SGS2, Ficeto, MIUI..) without lagfix... I am using phone a lot (battery lasts max 15-20hrs)... So, There is small diferences between them... I used them without lagfixes... Now, I installed JVP 2.3.4 Stock, Galaxian Kernel, and Converted to EXT4...
Personal opinion:
1. STOCK 2.3.4 JPV - Not bad, Fast, Works fine
2. +Galaxian Kernel - Faster 20-25% at least (using CPU Master because of OC 1.4GHz)
3. EXT4 Convert -> This speeded up my system by 20-30% more...
Explanation.. RFS file system is better with small files (under 5KBytes), and EXT4 is faster and a lot better with larger files... So, when you work with pictures, videos, and applications that uses bigger files then text, EXT4 shows its best side...
Now, my device is focused on Bigger apps, Pictures and HD Videos, so EXT4 is much faster for me...
Use FS that is better for your use...
P.S. EXT4 has faster R/W rate, so when recording, copying and similar, you will see difference...

can't wait until someone gets ubifs file system working, by all accounts should be awesome
Sent using geek power

Am on gb but i use ext4 lagfix because after number of apps increases, it lags!!

I've tried out 2.2 with lagfix and 2.3 without lagfix, but I find that now 2.3 is slower than 2.2 with lagfix. Not sure why this is true, but I noticed that starting apps was slower.