Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

USB Flash Drive File-System Tests On Fedora 21

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 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.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    FAT is still the 'default' filesystem for usb sticks, I wish it was included in this benchmark.

    Comment


    • #3
      Isn't the default exFAT on USB sticks larger then 32GB?

      Comment


      • #4
        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.

        Comment


        • #5
          On Linux, the USB stick recommendations are ext2 or ext4-without-journal (and more rarely, udf). Would be nice to include these.

          Comment


          • #6
            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

            Comment


            • #7
              can you include F2FS in the benchmark?

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by samdraz View Post
                can you include F2FS in the benchmark?
                RTFA... And for those asking why FAT nor exFAT was tested.
                Michael Larabel
                https://www.michaellarabel.com/

                Comment


                • #9
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    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.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X