File systems
Posted: 01 Dec 2015, 14:19
Linux can be used with several different file systems. Windows has FAT and NTFS - Linux has Ext, XFS, JFS, Reiser, Btrfs.
This is mostly the part we ignore we simply install the Linux distro and check if it works without regard to the filesystem. This is just fine because to most people this has no noticeable impact but It may be vital when you are pushing the limits.
Let us have a look at what the different Linux filesystems do:
ext4
Pro:
supported by all distro's, commercial and not, and based on ext3, so it's widely tested, stable and proven
all kinds for nice features (like extents, subsecond timestamps) which ext3 does not have.
Con:
rumor has it that it is slower than ext3, the fsync dataloss soap
XFS
Pro:
support for massive filesystems (up to 8 exabytes (yes, 'exa') on 64-bit systems)
online defrag
supported on RHEL6 and higher as the 'large filesystem' option
proven track record: xfs has been around for ages
Con:
wikipedia mentions slow metadata operations.
potential dataloss on power cut, UPS is recommended, said to be not really suitable for home systems but that may well be to emphasize the "pro status" of RedHat. (I think Centos 7 makes a nice desktop).
JFS
Pro:
said to be fast (I have little experience with JFS)
originated in AIX: proven technology
Con:
used and supported by virtually no-one, except IBM
ReiserFS
Pro:
fast with small files
very space efficient
stable and mature
Con:
not very active project anymore, next generation reiser 4 has succeeded it
no online defragmenter
Reiser 4
Pro:
very fast with small files
atomic transactions
very space efficient
metadata namespaces
plugin architecture, (crypto, compression, dedup and meta data plugins possible)
Connoisseurs love it.
Con:
Reiser4 has a very uncertain future and has not been merged yet
main supporting distro (SuSE) dropped it years ago but the transfer to btrfs has not manifested Suse as a much better Desktop.
More here
This is mostly the part we ignore we simply install the Linux distro and check if it works without regard to the filesystem. This is just fine because to most people this has no noticeable impact but It may be vital when you are pushing the limits.
Let us have a look at what the different Linux filesystems do:
ext4
Pro:
supported by all distro's, commercial and not, and based on ext3, so it's widely tested, stable and proven
all kinds for nice features (like extents, subsecond timestamps) which ext3 does not have.
Con:
rumor has it that it is slower than ext3, the fsync dataloss soap
XFS
Pro:
support for massive filesystems (up to 8 exabytes (yes, 'exa') on 64-bit systems)
online defrag
supported on RHEL6 and higher as the 'large filesystem' option
proven track record: xfs has been around for ages
Con:
wikipedia mentions slow metadata operations.
potential dataloss on power cut, UPS is recommended, said to be not really suitable for home systems but that may well be to emphasize the "pro status" of RedHat. (I think Centos 7 makes a nice desktop).
JFS
Pro:
said to be fast (I have little experience with JFS)
originated in AIX: proven technology
Con:
used and supported by virtually no-one, except IBM
ReiserFS
Pro:
fast with small files
very space efficient
stable and mature
Con:
not very active project anymore, next generation reiser 4 has succeeded it
no online defragmenter
Reiser 4
Pro:
very fast with small files
atomic transactions
very space efficient
metadata namespaces
plugin architecture, (crypto, compression, dedup and meta data plugins possible)
Connoisseurs love it.
Con:
Reiser4 has a very uncertain future and has not been merged yet
main supporting distro (SuSE) dropped it years ago but the transfer to btrfs has not manifested Suse as a much better Desktop.
More here