Just a simple question : Which file system do you recommend for Linux? Ext4…?

EDIT : Thanks to everyone who commented, I think I will try btrfs on my root partition and keep ext4 for my home directory 😃

      • lemmyreader@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Good that you mentioned that. Reminded me that I have an Arch Linux install here where I forgot that I did choose BTRFS during installation. Within maybe a month I noticed FS errors. Looked scary. Nervously searching for documentation was even more scary :

        https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/btrfs#btrfs_check -> This article or section is out of date. (Discuss in Talk:Btrfs) Warning: Since Btrfs is under heavy development, especially the btrfs check command, it is highly recommended to create a backup and consult btrfs-check(8) before executing btrfs check with the --repair switch.

        What is this? My beloved Arch Wiki is not 100% perfect!

        Then found this :

        WARNING: Using ‘–repair’ can further damage a filesystem instead of helping if it can’t fix your particular issue.

        Warning

        Do not use --repair unless you are advised to do so by a developer or an experienced user, and then only after having accepted that no fsck successfully repair all types of filesystem corruption. E.g. some other software or hardware bugs can fatally damage a volume.

        I figure this explains the popularity of BTRFS snapshot configurations. Luckily I had some backups :)

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Filesystem snapshots won’t help, if the filesystem itself corrupts. But I’ve been using BTRFS for 6 years now and haven’t had a file system corruption, so mileage may obviously vary.

  • RustyNova@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I don’t know what’s the brand neW meta pick, but at least BTRFS over Ext4. BTRFS is just more stable and less corruptable than Ext4. Heck, fedora changed to it as default

    • 8osm3rka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      To be fair, Fedora switching to something as default isn’t a good sign that you should start using it. I do agree, though, btrfs has come far enough to be a default choice for most people.

  • SaltyIceteaMaker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    So i normally go with ext4, however windows can’t really access ext4 drives so you’d need to find a file system that both support if you want to access the drive/partition from windows. My drive with all the games is ntfs for example which works in Windows and Linux. (At least for normal storage, idk if you can boot linux from it although i wouldn’t see why not)

  • KindaABigDyl@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ext4 is, afaik, the fastest as it’s the most understood

    Btrfs has compression and you can make snapshots to roll back to if something goes wrong (not necessary on immutable distros or NixOS tho)

    There are many other options, but I’ve only ever had a need for those two

  • muhyb@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I personally use ext4 everywhere but it is recommend to have BTRFS for your OS partition if you take snapshots often.

    • kixik@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Uff, somehow missed your post. See mine. That’s the FS I’m hoping to use next. I’m waiting for it to support swapfile, or alternatively read from official sources they won’t ever support it, :). But yes, that’s the one I’m looking forward to use.

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I’ve been very happy with btrfs. Ext4 is basically rock solid, so you can’t really go wrong with it, but btrfs has some nice features that ext4 doesn’t have, like snapshots. And it’s fast. I have an extremely cheap SSD that’s too slow to run anything with ext4, but actually usable with btrfs.

    • AProfessional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      btrfs is objectively slower than ext4. It is CoW and maintains more complex metadata.

      Only situations it wins is when lots of copies are made at once. Not a super common workflow compared to writes imo.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    As someone who ran BTRFS for years, I’m personally switching back to EXT4. Yes, the compression and other features are nice, but when things go wrong and you have to do a recovery, it’s not worth the complexity

    • Scribbd@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Also taking f2fs for a spin.

      As far as I have experienced (I didn’t measure this): don’t use that partition for container layers. It might just be my system, but f2fs has slowed my container engine down a bit.

      • Samsy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        I excactly doing this. I run coreOS with f2fs and it runs really fast. No issues so far.

      • Samsy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        For interoperability, yes. But with flash devices I mean ssd and nvme.

  • kixik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    How about bcachefs. I’m waiting for it to support swapfiles, which seems to be in the TODO list, but so far doesn’t work. If you use swap partition[s], or prefer not to have swap at all (I never fell for this, and besides swap is required for hibernation if that’s a thing for you), then bcachefs is ready for you. It’s already part of linux since 6.7, and on Artix, current linux is 6.8.9…

    To me is the FS to use. I’m still on luks + ext4 (no LVM) and do entire home backups with plain rsync to an external device. I’d have to learn new stuff, since ext4 is really basic and easy to configure if in need, but I think bcachefs is worth it, and as mentioned, just waiting for it to support swapfiles, :)

    • Kajika@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Thank you for sharing this. I didn’t know this FS yet. It seems new and have some nice goals. I always have a grudge against zfs/btrfs because of the resource usage/performance.

      I’ll keep an eye on this. I’d love to find some benchmarks.

  • qui@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I prefer using ext4 for stability. But if stability doesn’t matter to you, you should use BTRFS.

  • HarriPotero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    btrfs every day of the week. The only scenario where I’d even consider something else is for databases that would suffer from CoW.

    I’ve been running it on my home server since 2010. The same array has grown from 6x2TB to 6x4TB, one disk at a time as they’ve failed. Currently sitting at 2x18TB+1x4TB. No data loss even though many drives have failed.

  • verdigris@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Ext4 for most home users, because it’s simple and intuitive. Btrfs for anyone who has important data or wants to geek out about file systems. It’s got some really cool features, but to actually use most of them you’ll have to do some learning.