Btrfs vs. EXT4 vs. XFS vs. F2FS On Linux 3.10
Written by Michael Larabel in Software on 17 May 2013. Page 4 of 4. 32 Comments

While the IOzone read performance regressed for Btrfs after Linux 3.8, the write performance on the other hand has improved.

When running CompileBench, EXT4 was easily the fastest tested file-system while F2FS and Btrfs were the slowest and XFS was a nice mid-range performer. The Linux 3.10 kernel didn't change the performance drastically aside from some slight improvements in this single-disk configuration for F2FS and Btrfs.

F2FS and EXT4 were performing the best for the PostgreSQL database test, except for F2FS dropping off with the Linux 3.10 kernel. Similar to the IOzone read results, the Btrfs performance dropped off for pgbench after the 3.8 kernel release.

Overall, while Btrfs is much of the focus for Linux file-system discussions these days being viewed as the next-generation solution, when it comes to the performance on a single SSD disk, EXT4 is still generally fairing the best. Of course, this is just looking at the stock performance and not at the feature-sets or reliability of each file-system. Coming up next will be new Linux file-system benchmarks from a traditional HDD configuration.

About The Author
Author picture

Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience. Michael has written more than 10,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated benchmarking software. He can be followed via Twitter or contacted via MichaelLarabel.com.

Related Articles
Featured Articles
Trending Linux News