| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| What filesystem do you use? |
| ext 2,3,4 |
|
59% |
[ 61 ] |
| f2fs |
|
2% |
[ 3 ] |
| btrfs |
|
16% |
[ 17 ] |
| xfs |
|
13% |
[ 14 ] |
| zfs |
|
4% |
[ 5 ] |
| other |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 102 |
|
| Author |
Message |
DawgG
l33t
Joined: 17 Sep 2003
Posts: 871
|
 Posted: Fri Aug 20, 2021 10:47 am Post subject: Btrfs |
 |
|
btrfs EVERYWHERE (*).
i'm normally quite conservative in those regards but when testing BTRFS i found its features too useful to be lacked even in productive systems.
* execept squid-cache-dirs and some cheap-ass 2,5" external drives
_________________
DUMM KLICKT GUT. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shimbob
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 13 Sep 2003
Posts: 137
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tony0945
Watchman
Joined: 25 Jul 2006
Posts: 5127
Location: Illinois, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2021 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CooSee wrote: | | i only use 'xfs' and never disappointed me, even after 'power outage'. |
I only use ext4 and it keeps running during power outages even when the overhead lights are snapping on and off.
I have a UPS (multiples actually, every electronic device is on a UPS) and gentoo keeps sailing along. If power were to go out for five minutes then the 22kw emergency generator would kick on.
I once had a Windows computer and a VCR ruined by bad power (overvoltage fried the VCR) and once lost power for 23 and a half hours.
Never again.
I wouldn't trust a file system to save my data from bad power. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cord
Guru
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 346
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2024 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Handbook
| Quote: | ext4
Ext4 is a reliable, all-purpose all-platform filesystem, although it lacks modern features like reflinks.
XFS
Filesystem with metadata journaling which comes with a robust feature-set and is optimized for scalability. It has been continuously upgraded to include modern features. The only downside is that XFS partitions cannot yet be shrunk, although this is being worked on. XFS notably supports reflinks and Copy on Write (CoW) which is particularly helpful on Gentoo systems because of the amount of compiles users complete. XFS is the recommended modern all-purpose all-platform filesystem. Requires a partition to be at least 300MB. |
Why 
Maybe it should be corrected a little? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
szatox
Advocate
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 3329
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2024 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why? Well, why not?
What would you want to replace it with?
The actual FS used doesn't matter to like 99% of users, and the remaining 1% with particular expectations will know not to follow generic advise. I'm on ext myself, but mostly because it's old and boring rather than for any real reason.
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20334
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2024 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| szatox wrote: | | Well, why not? |
There ought to be a compelling reason to switch from ext3/4 to an obscure fs raised from the dead by RH. Especially when it still cannot be shrunk in place.
Admittedly I thought it had more issues than that, but I can't recall what. I'm thinking data loss / corruption issues.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
szatox
Advocate
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 3329
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2024 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A company I used to work for used XFS as a backed for moosefs, and I think it was used internally by CEPH until version 13 or 14, which is not _that_ obscure.
In both cases the reason was there were a lof of files stored on those partitions, and I think XFS offered better performance than EXT (at least in this scenario)
I agree that there should be a reason to make a change.
This hint is not a suggestion to migrate your system from EXT to XFS. It's intended for people who need some reassurance on their way to install their first Gentoo. In this case simplicity is more important than accuracy, and too much information would cause analysis paralysis.
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3607
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 04, 2024 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | | There ought to be a compelling reason to switch from ext3/4 |
Well... XFS is quite mature also, and has reflinking (nowdays) implemented, which provides (via other tools/ways) deduplication and snapshotting.
_________________
..: Zucca :..
Gentoo IRC channels reside on Libera.Chat.
--
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goverp
Advocate
Joined: 07 Mar 2007
Posts: 2113
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm wondering if bcachefs will turn into the next successful filesystem.
At the moment, I stick to f2fs for SSDs and NVMes, and ext4 for spinning rust. Philosophically, I prefer the separate layers of ext4/lvm/luks to filesystems that want to do it all themselves (not that I use lvm or luks - though at least this way I can omit them).
_________________
Greybeard |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
logrusx
Advocate
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Posts: 2164
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cord wrote: | Handbook
| Quote: | ext4
Ext4 is a reliable, all-purpose all-platform filesystem, although it lacks modern features like reflinks.
XFS
Filesystem with metadata journaling which comes with a robust feature-set and is optimized for scalability. It has been continuously upgraded to include modern features. The only downside is that XFS partitions cannot yet be shrunk, although this is being worked on. XFS notably supports reflinks and Copy on Write (CoW) which is particularly helpful on Gentoo systems because of the amount of compiles users complete. XFS is the recommended modern all-purpose all-platform filesystem. Requires a partition to be at least 300MB. |
Why :?:
Maybe it should be corrected a little? |
I remember seeing that several years ago but it didn't sound convincing. I dug some comparisons of filesystems and decided the advantages of other filesystems over EXT4 were inconsistent and aren't worth it. After all if I want to take advantage of them I need to have several filesystems at once which does not make sense. I came to the conclusion EXT4 offers the most in the most consistent way.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cord
Guru
Joined: 28 Apr 2007
Posts: 346
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| logrusx wrote: |
I came to the conclusion EXT4 offers the most in the most consistent way.
|
That's why I asked about XFS recommendation in Handbook. The most here were say out that they use EXT4, and not just say but also present arguments.
By the way, there's GPLv2 code (EXT2/3/4 driver) for MS Windows, and there's none for any other *nix FS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
logrusx
Advocate
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Posts: 2164
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cord wrote: | | logrusx wrote: |
I came to the conclusion EXT4 offers the most in the most consistent way.
|
That's why I asked about XFS recommendation in Handbook. The most here were say out that they use EXT4, and not just say but also present arguments.
By the way, there's GPLv2 code (EXT2/3/4 driver) for MS Windows, and there's none for any other *nix FS. |
That topic has been discussed in the past too. Strangely I don't remember any argument in favor of xfs. Maybe there weren't any.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20334
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Goverp wrote: | I'm wondering if bcachefs will turn into the next successful filesystem.
At the moment, I stick to f2fs for SSDs and NVMes, and ext4 for spinning rust. Philosophically, I prefer the separate layers of ext4/lvm/luks to filesystems that want to do it all themselves (not that I use lvm or luks - though at least this way I can omit them). |
As an SA, ZFS made life a lot easier than having to deal with multiple layers. ZFS is still "separate layers," it's just under a single umbrella. That integration makes a surprisingly huge difference "when it matters."
I don't understand the way ZFS works with Linux, and I don't want to maintain patching the kernel. Maybe that's easy "once you know," but there still seem to be problems with upgrades. I'll have to play with how that works so I can be ready to switch for my next system.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3607
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 05, 2024 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Goverp wrote: | | I'm wondering if bcachefs will turn into the next successful filesystem. |
I can only wish.
btrfs is great, but slow when performing scrub and rebalancing. 24h for five disk ~10TB array. It's easy to use and it checks all the bells and whistles, except for maybe encryption. Is it still planned? Per subvolume?
Bcachefs is promising... Still too young. That's why I've been resorting to XFS over LVM in my later machines. Shame XFS doesn't have proper shrinking implemented...
_________________
..: Zucca :..
Gentoo IRC channels reside on Libera.Chat.
--
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spanik
l33t
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Posts: 985
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
XFS all the way here: HD, SSD, hardware HD raid even USB sticks/HD's. Never had a single issue with it. I don't see what "not support shrinking" is a problem. I never had to shrink a partition, I always have to make them larger! These days I don't bother to partition anymore, I just use the whole disk as a single partition.
I think most use ext4 because it is the default/most cited/best know. I had trouble with ext3 and then switched to xfs. Since I'm happy I see no reasons to switch again.
_________________
Expert in non-working solutions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicop
n00b
Joined: 10 Apr 2014
Posts: 67
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Everything is said by Kent Overstreet, creator of bcachefs  :
| Quote: | | goal with bcachefs is to have the "performance, reliability, scalability, and robustness of XFS with modern features" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lars_the_bear
Guru
Joined: 05 Jun 2024
Posts: 364
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Spanik wrote: |
I think most use ext4 because it is the default/most cited/best known, |
I use ext4 for /home because it's the only Linux filesystem that Dropbox supports (although Dropbox Linux support is pretty poor regardless of the filesystem, in my experience). On my Gentoo installs I used XFS for everything except /home because the instructions said to use it. I don't know why.
I can't say I've noticed any difference.
BR, Lars. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Penguixrc
n00b
Joined: 28 Jul 2024
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| CooSee wrote: | maybe it's just my imagination, but i always found 'ext3/4' to chatty - like reiserfs.
i only use 'xfs' and never disappointed me, even after 'power outage'. |
i think the same, and it's also widely used in the enterprise world |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
turtles
Veteran
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 1679
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Phoronix just did a 2024 update:
https://www.phoronix.com/review/linux-611-filesystems
I still only see ext4 or ext/LVM/Luks on enterprise Linux laptops here at work, though I have seen some ZFS on large arrays when I looked into putting it on a laptop it seemed there was not much benefit with only one SSD and some possible pit falls.
I have never seen any of the others on a enterprise Linux laptop other than a dev running & supporting their own device.
I often wonder how many IT people support enterprise Linux laptops in their jobs, all the other IT people I know say they never see Linux on anything other than servers but my sample size is small.
Cheers
_________________
Donate to Gentoo |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
szatox
Advocate
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 3329
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A somewhat big company I used to work for asked all new hires what OS they want on their laptops, and almost all laptops (Windows and Linux alike) were managed by a dedicated team, so yes, it does happen.
To be fair, this company had IT department big enough to actively develop their own money printers, as well as money paper, money ink, and money trucks, so it could be a bit of a special case in the world of outsourcing everything as much as possible.
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
logrusx
Advocate
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Posts: 2164
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I too worked in a company which gave you a choice between Windows and Linux but with all that proprietary software and integration between it, it was a little bit of pain to use Linux. You only had to go through the IT department if you wanted to have it as a main system or if you wanted the VM to have an IP in the internal network. You could otherwise run whatever distribution you wanted in a VM for as long as the traffic went out through the host OS network interface.
I didn't stick around long enough to get one, so I can't share personal experience. I guess most of the colleagues who wanted to use Linux used it inside a VM so that they have the Windows fir the proprietary software that was a pain to use under Linux.
One thing I vaguely remember is the official distribution wasn't RHEL. Maybe Manjaro or Fedora, but I'm not sure.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3607
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2024 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Those benchmarks gives hope for bcachefs. I mean it was already performing better than btrfs... Although btrfs has been slow since the beginning.
_________________
..: Zucca :..
Gentoo IRC channels reside on Libera.Chat.
--
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
logrusx
Advocate
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Posts: 2164
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2024 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was involved in the thread where somebody complained about kernels 6.9 not being in tree anymore and they can't use ZFS because of that. This made me take a look at it and I would say I personally wouldn't have chosen that poorly documented thing never in a million years. Their site contains more on their meetups than on their product.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 20334
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2024 3:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| logrusx wrote: | I was involved in the thread where somebody complained about kernels 6.9 not being in tree anymore and they can't use ZFS because of that. This made me take a look at it and I would say I personally wouldn't have chosen that poorly documented thing never in a million years. Their site contains more on their meetups than on their product.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
Which website did you go to? openzfs.org or zfsonlinux.org? I'm guessing openzfs.org, which is more of a "parent" organization for zfs development as a whole, not only for Linux.
I've been to both and forgot that, so it took me a while to remember zfsonlinux. That said, it isn't much better. I didn't see any easy way to know which kernel they support.
ZFS itself is good. but I'm not convinced about ZFSoL. I'd use it without hesitation on BSD.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
logrusx
Advocate
Joined: 22 Feb 2018
Posts: 2164
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 13, 2024 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjp wrote: | That said, it isn't much better. I didn't see any easy way to know which kernel they support.
|
I was looking for the same thing. Nothing on openzfs.org, not even in their GitHub log.
The other site didn't pop in duckduckgo.
The only documentation I could find was the man page. Not very useful. I would choose that if I was a masochist or I was very excited about something about that fs and I can't think of why filesystems could be that exciting.
Best Regards,
Georgi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
