Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Operating Systems
ChromeOS & Linux
Which Linux File System during installation
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MacDefender" data-source="post: 993864" data-attributes="member: 83059"><p>IMO you should stick with ext4 unless there is a specific reason why ext4 isn't suitable for your use case. ext4 is still the most supported, most stable, and has the most tools around it for your needs.</p><p></p><p>Btrfs is promising and great if you depend on certain features only it provides. For example, snapshots are tightly integrated with some distributions like OpenSUSE Tumbleweed to provide fast rollbacks in case your nightly build is a bust. Its transparent compression is also great if you're space constrained. But it still has yet to stabilize despite 10+ years of wishing it did -- the behavior under near-disk-full conditions is still odd at best, and it can corrupt itself for no good reason.</p><p></p><p>XFS is really great for working with extremely large files. But it is much more unforgiving to situations like hard shutdowns, or SSDs that lie about data being committed. Corruption to XFS disks tend to result in massive data loss, while corruption to ext4 tends to isolate itself to single files or at worst a directory. But if you're working with a ton of large media, XFS could be a worthwhile choice.</p><p></p><p>Reiserfs has lost almost all of its appeal compared to its golden days, but one thing it still excels at is extremely fast metadata operations, especially deletion of large folder trees. I still use reiserfs for build servers where creating and deleting large chroots is a common use case. Other than that, I don't really recommend it for much.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MacDefender, post: 993864, member: 83059"] IMO you should stick with ext4 unless there is a specific reason why ext4 isn't suitable for your use case. ext4 is still the most supported, most stable, and has the most tools around it for your needs. Btrfs is promising and great if you depend on certain features only it provides. For example, snapshots are tightly integrated with some distributions like OpenSUSE Tumbleweed to provide fast rollbacks in case your nightly build is a bust. Its transparent compression is also great if you're space constrained. But it still has yet to stabilize despite 10+ years of wishing it did -- the behavior under near-disk-full conditions is still odd at best, and it can corrupt itself for no good reason. XFS is really great for working with extremely large files. But it is much more unforgiving to situations like hard shutdowns, or SSDs that lie about data being committed. Corruption to XFS disks tend to result in massive data loss, while corruption to ext4 tends to isolate itself to single files or at worst a directory. But if you're working with a ton of large media, XFS could be a worthwhile choice. Reiserfs has lost almost all of its appeal compared to its golden days, but one thing it still excels at is extremely fast metadata operations, especially deletion of large folder trees. I still use reiserfs for build servers where creating and deleting large chroots is a common use case. Other than that, I don't really recommend it for much. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top