EXT4/Btrfs/XFS/F2FS Benchmarks On Linux 3.17

[phoronix]

Phoronix: EXT4/Btrfs/XFS/F2FS Benchmarks On Linux 3.17

With the Linux 3.17 kernel due out soon, here's our routine file-system benchmarks we do each kernel cycle to see how the popular Linux file-systems have evolved between kernel releases.

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20949

[halo9en]

Hmm, I can't decide. F2FS or EXT4 for my new SSD ?

Previous results were also mixed. Suggestions?

Edit: desktop usage, not server. Not running apache, don't care about sql performance.

[jrch2k8]

Well, well, well, lets check some history here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...tem&px=MTc3NzU
Lets see how the HarryPotter fanboys defend this piece of BullshiTRFS with CancerD now?

btrfs is not an speedster file system like neither ZFS is genius, this advantage of those file systems is the ability of LiveRAID, CoW, SnapShots, Dedup, Metadata, compression on the fly, encryption on the fly, Volumes, SubVolumes,etc. When you use your computer for things other than watching porn and check your facebook status BTRFS and ZFS provide real solution to real problems.

for watching porn and checking facebook etx3-4/f2fs are way more than enough in fact almost overkill, so you can stick to that and be just fine for the foreseeable future.

for literate/professionals/engineers/other types of smart people that need computers for stuff a bit more complex than play angry birds BTRFS and systemd offer fantastic solutions to real problems that otherwise will require very ugly insecure hacks(like is done today with sysV and other filesystems. but at this point i don't expect you to understand it. Is big boys stuffs)

[mwpow3ll]

btrfs is not an speedster file system like neither ZFS is genius, this advantage of those file systems is the ability of LiveRAID, CoW, SnapShots, Dedup, Metadata, compression on the fly, encryption on the fly, Volumes, SubVolumes,etc. When you use your computer for things other than watching porn and check your facebook status BTRFS and ZFS provide real solution to real problems.

for watching porn and checking facebook etx3-4/f2fs are way more than enough in fact almost overkill, so you can stick to that and be just fine for the foreseeable future.

for literate/professionals/engineers/other types of smart people that need computers for stuff a bit more complex than play angry birds BTRFS and systemd offer fantastic solutions to real problems that otherwise will require very ugly insecure hacks(like is done today with sysV and other filesystems. but at this point i don't expect you to understand it. Is big boys stuffs)

Just a simple observation:

While I can appreciate the solutions that btrfs and zfs bring to the table, it doesn't negate the fact that there appears to be plenty of room for improvement for both.

[magika]

btrfs is not an speedster file system like neither ZFS is genius, this advantage of those file systems is the ability of LiveRAID, CoW, SnapShots, Dedup, Metadata, compression on the fly, encryption on the fly, Volumes, SubVolumes,etc. When you use your computer for things other than watching porn and check your facebook status BTRFS and ZFS provide real solution to real problems.

for watching porn and checking facebook etx3-4/f2fs are way more than enough in fact almost overkill, so you can stick to that and be just fine for the foreseeable future.

for literate/professionals/engineers/other types of smart people that need computers for stuff a bit more complex than play angry birds BTRFS and systemd offer fantastic solutions to real problems that otherwise will require very ugly insecure hacks(like is done today with sysV and other filesystems. but at this point i don't expect you to understand it. Is big boys stuffs)

atari is well known anti-systemd troll and a founder of "Hate systemd" website so dont feed him.

[aande]

interesting. I wonder why btrfs is still so much behind after ext4 after all this time in terms of speed.

I ordered a new study laptop which will be only running arch, would you recommend ext4 or btrfs for it? I would go for ext4 since I wont be using encryption or compression on btrfs. Or does btrfs have any other features that might be potentially useful to me?
(this one: http://www.cyberport.de/acer-aspire-...-98M_1695.html)

[curaga]

for watching porn and checking facebook etx3-4/f2fs are way more than enough in fact almost overkill, so you can stick to that and be just fine for the foreseeable future.

I demand a PTS benchmark profile for porn watching and facebook checking.

"EXT4 regressed in 3.24 in PornMark 0.4, but only in the facial sub-benchmark".

[ua=42]

The main feature of btrfs is that it hashes all the files, so that it can detect bitrot and if in a raid... be able to repair it. Hashing the files takes time. Its a trade off. Somewhat slower file reads/writes for a more secure filesystem vs speed.

[vivo]

The main feature of btrfs is that it hashes all the files, so that it can detect bitrot and if in a raid... be able to repair it. Hashing the files takes time. Its a trade off. Somewhat slower file reads/writes for a more secure filesystem vs speed.

I will take that any day over slightly more speed. I am using btrfs on my home server in RAID 1 exactly for that reason (with an ext4 backup and CrashPlan, just in case). I considered ZFS, but its non-nativeness,
RAM-chewing feature and my server's lack of ECC put me off. I also only have 8GB RAM, and I do run VMs as well.

On my desktop, I again use btrfs, but because I keep telling myself that I will start using its snapshot capabilities for my desktop.
Having it on an SSD, I cannot feel the performance difference compared to ext4. I also use nouveau with my GTX 770, as I don't play games under Linux and couldn't get the Nvidia driver to stop tearing under KDE.

I also do a fresh install on my desktop every couple of months, and that also includes a fresh /home partition (all data I want to keep is on the server), so I don't mind if btrfs bites my desktop every now and then.

[jwilliams]

The main feature of btrfs is that it hashes all the files, so that it can detect bitrot and if in a raid... be able to repair it. Hashing the files takes time. Its a trade off. Somewhat slower file reads/writes for a more secure filesystem vs speed.

The time to compute (or check) the hash has insignificant effect on the speed of btrfs. The time to read and write the hash metadata has only a small effect.

The hashing is not the reason btrfs is usually slower. Most of it has to do with the COW nature of btrfs and resulting fragmentation (although in a few cases, COW will outperform non-COW filesystems). Some of it has to do with btrfs still not being well optimized.

Also, assuming he has not changed the IOMeter fileserver access pattern benchmark, the fio tester benchmark is doing 512 Byte IOs, which are an especially weak spot for btrfs.