Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

6-Way File-System Comparison On The Linux 4.1 Kernel

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

  • 6-Way File-System Comparison On The Linux 4.1 Kernel

    Phoronix: 6-Way File-System Comparison On The Linux 4.1 Kernel

    With the Linux 4.1 kernel having recently been released, I decided to conduct a fresh round of file-system comparisons on this new kernel using a solid-state drive. The file-systems tested in this article were the in-tree EXT4, Btrfs, XFS, F2FS, ReiserFS, and NILFS2 file-systems while a follow-up article will take a look at the out-of-tree contenders like Reiser4 and ZFS atop Linux 4.1.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=21787

  • #2
    Thank you Michael, I really like these articles. Would it be possible to include in the same graphs for each file system 2 bars, one for the previous linux version to compare?

    Comment


    • #3
      I was using xfs, but recently switched to ext4, with plans for switch to btrfs(I will wait for it to stabilize a bit before the jump)

      Comment


      • #4
        I'm more than happy with EXT4.

        Comment


        • #5
          I've been planning to setup a Btrfs-based file server for my home for the past year. I'm just waiting for RAID5/6 to stabilize. I finally feel though it is relatively close, should happen within the next 2-3 kernel releases.

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm currently using ext4, and I'll probably stick to that for root partition, but I've been looking to move my data/media partition to btrfs for easier backup management.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by sobkas View Post
              I was using xfs, but recently switched to ext4, with plans for switch to btrfs(I will wait for it to stabilize a bit before the jump)
              I was happy with xfs, too, until I messed up my partition table (my fault, not file system's). At that point I have discovered that while there are tools that will help you recover an ext partition, hardly any will work for xfs. Plus, as I read in the meantime, xfs's strength is handling huge files. And I don't edit video.

              Back to the article, it's nice, but the picture is more complex. I'd throw a mechanical drive in there, because the best file system for a SSD will not necessarily perform the same on a HDD. And many people still use those for storage. I'd also test using SSDs with controllers from different manufacturers, there may be a few surprises in that area.

              Comment


              • #8
                Why mount btrfs nodatacow instead of using chattr +C on the relevant directory?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by s_j_newbury View Post
                  Why mount btrfs nodatacow instead of using chattr +C on the relevant directory?
                  For databases? In the case of automated tests, etc, or if that partition is just used for database storage only.
                  Michael Larabel
                  http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by thelongdivider View Post
                    Thank you Michael, I really like these articles. Would it be possible to include in the same graphs for each file system 2 bars, one for the previous linux version to compare?
                    For this particular test, no, as I only had time to test this particular SSD on Linux 4.1 before re-tasking it to a different system, etc. It really depends on the interest level and related interest of recent articles whether it's a multi-way kernel comparison article, etc.
                    Michael Larabel
                    http://www.michaellarabel.com/

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X