F2FS Brings Interesting "Device Aliasing" Feature To Linux 6.13 To Carve Out Partition

[phoronix]

Phoronix: F2FS Brings Interesting "Device Aliasing" Feature To Linux 6.13 To Carve Out Partition

The Flash Friendly File-System (F2FS) updates were sent out on Monday for Linux 6.13 and include one very interesting new feature for this file-system: device aliasing as a means of being able to temporarily carve out a portion of the partition for other purposes...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/F2FS-Linux-6.13

[[deXter]]

Ooh, seems like they also added a lazytime mount option.

F2FS is starting to look more and more interesting. Anyone here using it as their daily driver?

[Quackdoc]

This is bloody cool, I so plan on tinkering with this

[Ferrum Master]

Ooh, seems like they also added a lazytime mount option.

F2FS is starting to look more and more interesting. Anyone here using it as their daily driver?

I am on my Optane OS drive... never had any sorts of corruption whatsoever despite power losses due to overclocking and tripping fuses...

To be short... on certain things it is more snappy than EXT4, but... damn, lately there so many updates and tweaks for anything, basically I have to take a spin and compare again.

[the-burrito-triangle]

Is there any benefit of using F2FS over EXT4, XFS, or BTRFS?

[Quackdoc]

Is there any benefit of using F2FS over EXT4, XFS, or BTRFS?

I had a noticable improvement in speed on my crappy SSDs and my NVMe

[[deXter]]

Is there any benefit of using F2FS over EXT4, XFS, or BTRFS?

Compared to BTRFS, it's 2-3x faster.
Compared to the other two though it's not much faster (or maybe even a bit slower in a couple of cases), but one big advantage over the two is that F2FS supports compression.

https://www.phoronix.com/review/linux-611-filesystems

The main overall advantage though was that is that it's supposed to be flash-storage friendly, but that doesn't really mean much these days due to controller abstraction, and drives these days having high endurance compared to early SSDs. Probably makes more sense for less-complex flash media though, like eMMC and SD cards.

[kylew77]

I think I understand it better in this post than the first post but I'm still not able to think of a use case. If I understand this correctly you can basically make a file on the f2fs file system and format that file as say ext4 and write to it as say /dev/sdc1 or whatever block device id it will get. When done using it there is some mechanism to delete the file and the space is reclaimed as f2fs space as if the ext4 partition was never there because it just lived in a file?

[Chewi]

I think I understand it better in this post than the first post but I'm still not able to think of a use case. If I understand this correctly you can basically make a file on the f2fs file system and format that file as say ext4 and write to it as say /dev/sdc1 or whatever block device id it will get. When done using it there is some mechanism to delete the file and the space is reclaimed as f2fs space as if the ext4 partition was never there because it just lived in a file?

You've been able to do that already since forever using a loop device. I think the difference here is that it's more optimised, but I'm really not sure.

[Ferrum Master]

The main overall advantage though was that is that it's supposed to be flash-storage friendly, but that doesn't really mean much these days due to controller abstraction, and drives these days having high endurance compared to early SSDs. Probably makes more sense for less-complex flash media though, like eMMC and SD cards.

Contrary... modern drives have much less endurance being multi level and much higher density, they more prone unlike the older SLC or MLC drives with much higher tech node, but they were much more robust. Enterprise/industrial drives still up to day use only SLC type NANDs... guess why?

It is pretty funny, but we are actually being scammed here.