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 😃

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
-46 points

Upvoted. Not everyone wants to rely on backups and restore broken system every month like on BTRFS

permalink
report
parent
reply
72 points

We’re not in 2014 anymore.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

File system is a core component of any electronic system. Even if it’s just 1% less stable than other ones, it’s still less stable. Maybe it’s faster in some cases and supports better backups but ehh idk if it’s worth it. Losing documents is something you probably want to avoid at all costs

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

Yeah, but it isn’t noticeably “less stable” if at all anymore* unless you mean stable as in “essentially in maintenance mode”, and clearly good enough for SLES to make it the default. Stop spreading outdated FUD and make backups regularly if you care about your documents (ext4 won’t save you from disk failure either which is probably the more likely scenario).

* not talking about the RAID 5/6 modes, but those are explicitly marked unstable

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

I disagree. My partition is ext4, but Timeshift saved my ass when an upgrade went wrong. I just had to restore the system from a previous snapshot taken before the upgrade.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Of course updates can break stuff. What I don’t understand is why would you intentionally go for a less stable FS that can break and corrupt all files? It’s especially bad on old machines with limited space where full backups are not possible

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Are you talking about ext4 or BTRFS?

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

I never tested BTRFS on SSDs under 128GB or even HDDs, but never had a corrupted one.

Those anecdotes are worth little so it would be best to have current data.

One of the above points was that the claims are outdated, which would be really interesting to verify.

Like, making a study with many different parameters

  • hdd, sata ssd, nvme ssd, emmc, etc.
  • size: 50-200MB, 1GB, 16GB, 128GB, 500GB, 4TB (from small embedded, to IOT, to usb flash drive, to smartphone, to laptop, to Server/Backup)
  • amount of usage: percentage filled, read/write per minute
  • BTRFS actions: snapshots, balance, defragment
permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

If full backups aren’t possible that’s an administrator failure.

Reliance on a file system to never fail rather than have proper backups, is an administrator failure.

ANY system can, and will, fail. Thinking and behaving otherwise is an administrator failure.

“Everything gets gone, sooner or later” - being prepared for it is good administrator behaviour.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

And LVM is more than good enough for occasional snapshots before a major upgrade.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What’s lvm like compared to btrfs?

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Well lvm makes a shit filesystem and btrfs is useless at volume management.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

LVM creates “block devices” and is FS agnostic. You can install btrfs on an LVM volume if you wanted. Or any other FS for that matter.

But since it doesn’t know anything about the FS it can be a bit more cumbersome to modify volumes (especially when shrinking).

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points
*

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 :)

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Linux

!linux@lemmy.ml

Create post

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word “Linux” in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

  • Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
  • No misinformation
  • No NSFW content
  • No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

Community stats

  • 8.9K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.6K

    Posts

  • 154K

    Comments