Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: USB Flash Drive File-System Tests On Fedora 21

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    16,012

    Default USB Flash Drive File-System Tests On Fedora 21

    Phoronix: USB Flash Drive File-System Tests On Fedora 21

    For those wondering what Linux file-system is most performant on a USB 3.0 flash drive, here are some benchmarks using Fedora 21.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=21280

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    206

    Default

    FAT is still the 'default' filesystem for usb sticks, I wish it was included in this benchmark.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    102

    Default

    Isn't the default exFAT on USB sticks larger then 32GB?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Koszalin, Poland
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ObiWan View Post
    Isn't the default exFAT on USB sticks larger then 32GB?
    Maybe, but exfat doesn't work on any of my OS's so I don't care. By 'default' I meant the filesystem that is most commonly used by people and widely supported.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,454

    Default

    On Linux, the USB stick recommendations are ext2 or ext4-without-journal (and more rarely, udf). Would be nice to include these.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,921

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyber Killer View Post
    Maybe, but exfat doesn't work on any of my OS's so I don't care. By 'default' I meant the filesystem that is most commonly used by people and widely supported.
    That'd probably be exfat

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    12

    Default

    can you include F2FS in the benchmark?

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by samdraz View Post
    can you include F2FS in the benchmark?
    RTFA... And for those asking why FAT nor exFAT was tested.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    RTFA... And for those asking why FAT nor exFAT was tested.
    Why would benchmarks fail on FAT? Are they writing too large files or using too long filenames or what?

    Also would be nice to redo Fedora graphics benchmarks because Fedora got mesa-10.3 →mesa-10.4 update last week. My SandyBridge machine finally advertises OpenGL 3.3 by default. I'm experimenting with geometry shaders right now.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    RTFA... And for those asking why FAT nor exFAT was tested.
    "Sadly missing from the mix is F2FS due to Fedora's decision (and wishing to keep this comparison to an out-of-the-box representation on F21) but that will hopefully change in the future. The exFAT file-system was also left out as it's not officially supported by Fedora. FAT32 was left out since some of the used benchmarks will not run on the file-system."

    Sorry but that's a terrible decision. For most people in the world USB media uses FAT or exFAT. Mainly because it's cross platform. Linux filesystems are mainly only compatible with Linux systems or require installing unsupported 3rd party drivers which are often more or less broken (like ext support on Windows). Why would anyone use USB keys just for sharing files between Linux systems? If it's mainly your own computer, you could just store them internally in a laptop. SSD space is cheap these days. This test is completely useless.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •