Ext4 vs Btrfs. All my systems (4) have been using BTRFS for some time now without any issues. XFS A number of Phoronix readers have been asking about some fresh file-system comparisons on recent kernels. BTRFS VS EXT4 performance in Raid 1. Your assumptions are correct, the best FS for Storj on Linux is ext4. BTRFS have some fancy features, and could help you manage your disk better in some automation-future-proof way. ext3 is the most common format. See moreThis article will look at the difference between the Btrfs vs. 7 - Btrfs vs. F2FS vs. EXT4 is better in the general case. Btrfs, EXT4, XFS, F2FS, and NILFS2 were tested on a Linux 5. Btrfs Benchmarks comparison, here is a wider look at mainline file-systems on the Linux 4. 355 Btrfs—short for "B-Tree File System" and frequently pronounced "butter" or "butter eff ess"—is the most advanced filesystem present in the mainline Linux kernel. My prognosis is that ReFS is going to pound it into the ground but BTRFS will keep getting better as the years go on. BTRFS integration is currently a technology preview in Proxmox VE. Ext4 comes up with some new and improved features such as: Extent-based. btrfs sub cr /mnt/@ (the @ alone is the convention for "root directory" in btrfs) btrfs sub cr /mnt/@home. A) crater a new filesystem and restore from backup. Btrfs has greater I/O latency than ext4. Learn how to compare btrfs with other file systems like ZFS, ext4, or XFS in terms of features, benefits, and drawbacks. Pros: Individual file size: 16GB to 2TB. As I have mentioned earlier, snapshots are created with minimal size due to the use of copy-on-write. For most uses I still use ext4. Each of the tested file-systems were carried out with the default mount options in an out-of-the-box manner. Snapshots and self-healing are the top reasons for me to use zfs or btrfs over ext4. On a slow Linux box with an ext4 filesystem, the same operation takes less than a second. It is a file system which is completely made from scratch. You can create up to 264 files in a Btrfs system. EXT4 vs XFS vs Btrfs vs ZFSをfioでベンチマークを取ってみました。. Be careful with all you read about btrfs on the 'net. XFS is very well established and changing slowly, and the same can be said for EXT4. Or, B) use lvm2 thin provisioning in tandem with xfs. BTRFS is not good for Storj, it’s also not production ready. I would deploy ext4 on smallest appliances only, and Btrfs on servers and workstations. Which to use: ext4 or Btrfs? For now, ext4 is the winner despite identical performance. Add a Comment. Probably those edge cases are not visible on an external USB hard drive, could be visible with external SSDs on a USB3. EXT4. NILFS has to be credited for the quickest unmount time, and an surprising overall consistency; no one of the others comes even close. What makes no sense is that neither is what most Linux admins would chose, but rather XFS which is even. However benchmarks test quite narrow parameters which may not be reflected by running an OS. 4 To 4. It is an updated and also reliable file system. XFS cannot : No built-in RAID, No built-in LVM support. Though not as large of a difference when comparing to an SD card. The most widely used filesystems are Ext4 and XFS, with the latter being the default filesystem in RHEL-based distros and Ext4 being the standard filesystem in Debian and Ubuntu distributions. The 3 types of file systems support large file size and volume size. Partition Size: Ext4 supports partition size up to 1 EiB, while Btrfs supports partition size up to 16 EiB. Stepping away from btrfs also means stepping away from several "advanced" Synology packages and features exclusive to btrfs formatted systems. Notes (table lines after 2019 were added after the article was published): 2015 - Made the switch from hardware RAID to Btrfs. Btrfs has it's own volume management. Planning on doing a fresh install as my LUKS partitions after a DD and resizing are a disaster. It takes a second to snapshot, and deletes of a snapshotted tree what takes ext4 26 hours is a few minutes on btrfs. With btrfs I got 130-160MB. What is the difference between F2FS and EXT4: speed and stability. 2 TB. ext4 if I don't care about the install. Phoronix: Linux 5. 4 Taking ZFS For A Test Drive On Ubuntu 16. the question is about specifically the recovery speed of running fsck / xfs_repair against any volume formatted in xfs vs ext4, the backup part isnt really relevent back in the. Theory of switching from ext4 to btrfs. inf file and click. Btrfs lacks the RAID-Z features of ZFS, so RAID is still in the experimental state with Btrfs. That bug apart, any delayed allocation filesystem (ext4 and btrfs included) will lose a significant number or un-synched data in case of uncontrolled poweroff. Linux5. ext4 is an "advanced" version of ext3 with various improvements, basically an upgrade to the ext3 format. I wouldn't go for ZFS on root although it is fully supported on Proxmox 6. Btrfs with its copy-on-write behavior leads to it having a lot of features but at least in its out-of-the-box behavior generally being a fair amount slower than EXT4/F2FS/XFS. Depends on what you're looking for. Linux下Ext4和Btrfs文件系统的区别 简单地说，文件系统是一个数据库，它包含文件和数据的物理位置，以便在需要的时候检索。在文件系统的帮助下，操作系统控制如何存储和检索数据。文件系统通常包含被分成若干组的文件，这些组被称为目录，它们可以保存文件以及其中. I have 6 disks so I have created 3 logical disks, 2 SSDs each - just for testing. Btrfs lacks maturity and stability at the time of this writing but is more feature-rich compared to EXT4. I'm going to reinstall Artix and I want to make the right choice. In fact I myself would recommend BTRFS over EXT4 for a regular hobbyist user because it spans multiple partitions, it's less likely to fill up your hard drive. Perhaps most interesting from today's results were the startup-time application results where the Flash-Friendly File-System easily won across all of those. 再將資料再回存到 NAS, 這部份. btrfs trades a small amount of stability and performance for a bunch of advanced features and functionality. The Btrfs file type supports partition size up to 16 EIB (Exibyte). exFAT vs NTFS. Rep: XFS has unbalanced performance, but in the best use case blows away many other formats. Btrfs can mutate the volume to any. With the impending (eventual) switch from ext4 to btrfs for the default and only supported filesystem either in OMV or more likely OMV6, I wanted to run my understanding of how this could work and see how skewed my interpretation is. Note that everything with LVM is at the block level which has major limitations. Btrfs trails the other options for a database in terms of latency and throughput. Click Remove. This file system overcomes the volume size limit of FAT16 and allows DOS real-mode code to handle the format. For my basic mainstream use, it seems just as good as EXT4, neither worse nor better. 2. It does its job well. Pro: supported by all distro's, commercial and not, and based on ext3, so it's widely tested, stable and proven. For Btrfs, if they could clean up the bugs in the early days it could attract more users. BTRFS also had somewhat higher latency than EXT4, meaning that it took longer for files to be accessed on the file system. EXT4. Fragmentation is a natural byproduct of copy-on-write. If not, ext4 is a better choice. EXT4 has been the Linux default since 2006, following the previous EXT3. While RAID 5 and 6 can be compared to RAID Z. There was a higher risk than upon disconnection or loss of power than some of the files are truncated. Distribution of one file system to several devices. If you buy a modern drive, it will support native trim/discard, have appropriate overprovisioning, and use internal wear leveling by default. Dependending on the hardware, ext4 will generally have a bit better performance. Answer (1 of 3): please examine Comparison of file systems - Wikipedia I would suggest to use ext4 as a good and robust filesystem easy for setup and any kind of recovery. 4x6TB SHR1 on an ext4 volume, ~8TB of data stored of the available 16. You may have a hard time deciding which filesystem to use. というのをベースにするとXFSが良い。. EXT4 is obviously the choice for production machines. 17現在、Ext4と比べ特にBtrfsが遅かったりはしない。SSD上の動作であればむしろ有利なくらいだ。 つまり、Ext4のほうが速く、Btrfsが遅いカーネルもある。 例を示そう。 Linux5. Complexity: btrfs is a more complex file system than ext4, and may require more advanced knowledge and expertise to manage and maintain. The very things you mentioned are mucho worthy and attractive features of a modern OS, totally lacking in EXT4. Otherwise, I don't think you'd notice the performance difference. Checksumming blocks comes at a price, and I don't want my filesystem to silently give me corrupted blocks like ext4 happily does. pure capsaicin. 0xBenchmark This reliable open-source benchmark by 0xlab is an overall benchmark used by the Linaro android team during their famous toolchain demonstration. After following these instructions, formatting with btrfs, and loading up the card with many games, you need to run this command: btrfs filesystem defragment -czstd -r -v /run/media/ [SD card name] This forces the file system to take another look at every file and re-compress it. and. I've been considering doing LVM+EXT4 or BTRFS for the new install. 其實你提到一個重點了. These include the Ext4, XFS, ZFS, and BTRFS. Btrfs is slower, especially on non-SSDs, because of CoW, but has a whole lot more going on under the hood in way of features and data integrity. Let’s talk about the advantages Btrfs boasts over the traditional and more popular ext4 filesystem. In the case of Synology NAS servers, we have the possibility of configuring EXT4 or Btrfs, in fact, in the volume configuration wizard we can choose. Regardless of your problem, I would use btrfs if you use its features like snapshots, subvolumes etc. Interestingly, the first version of the Ext4 filesystem, the Extended filesystem (“Ext”), came out in 1992 for the Minix OS. 8ではPhoronixのテストの結果ではXFSが非常に速く、Ext4が遅い。a lot of btrfs' perception of 'breaking' is actually due to checksums (correctly) finding fault on a users data and (correctly) not allowing mounting of the filesystem until it's fixed. 2. 6. Con: rumor has it that it is slower than ext3, the fsync dataloss soap. In fact, BTRFS is also a copy-on-write system to support fault tolerance and file recovery, and provides easy management. Backwards compatibility. It is very important to configure the correct file system, because each one has clearly different characteristics, and some are better for a certain use, and others are better for another use. I've got OMV up and running in a ProxMox VM running on my little server, OS is on an SSD and I have two 2. But technically, rather than copy, "relocate" the shared folders (Shared Folder/Edit) to the new volume (be sure to check "data integrity" for file-healing capability). With regular file systems, even when you have one drive protection, it might turn out that some files have been corrupted and in case of one drive failure the RAID cannot be restored. Functions Ext4 XFS; Maximum Files: The ext4 can create up to 2 32 files, equal to 4 billion. The cache size is 64 GB, located on a NVMe device, writethrough mode, btrfs filesystem usage is 1. Hi everyone. There are a lot of different file systems in Linux like Ext4, Btrfs, ZFS, XFS and even though each has its unique set of capabilities, the debate mostly comes down to Ext4 vs Btrfs because they’re more commonly used. This drive is going to replace one of the current drives and reading up on btrfs I'm starting to wonder if I should partition this drive with btrfs instead of my usual LVM with ext4. The ZFS file system combines a volume manager and file. Latest Ask Fedora topics - Fedora DiscussionThese are both running SHR-2 using the same 3TB WD Red drives. Btrfs has been a stable part of the Linux kernel since 2013, and you can reformat your hard drives using the file system today. If you're truly worried about bit-rot, mdadm won't do a thing for you. Btrfs is a big leap past ext4 and XFS because it supports features such as: Copy-on-write; Subvolumes, snapshots, and rollbacks; Online defragmentationThere are couple scripts/tools, that let you DIY (such as SteamOS 3. Btrfs will give you much more, replication, quotas, consistency, Drive versioning disk space saving. This can impact the performance of sequential writes, reducing performance by up to 50%. I've used BTRFS for. I have first partition which is biggest of all and it is the main storage for system other partitions where an OS is installed are smaller than this one. Btrfs also just works if you use it in the same fashion. removes the need for LVM and thus eliminates 1 layer for filesystem-ing (if that’s a word) On top of that, in 2008, the principal developer of EXT3 and. Tbh, it depends on game by game basis Team Fortress 2 will go as low as nearly 50%, same for KSP. The only normally working implementation is on Synology. However, it's backwards compatible with ext3. SSD optimization. But. I know how to maintain it even in case of horrible events. When benchmarking my volume with "fio", BTRFS is unfortunately 3 times slower than EXT4 on simultaneous random read/writes, but performance is similar for sequential read/writes. Also I've thought about btrfs again. Now that it is up and running, and backups/sync and every. This is the number of data disks times the number of blocks. Stay below 85% if you can help it, just to prevent performance loss and end of space issues. Ext4 file system is an ideal choice. Share. So for a large video collection, I think I will stick with ext4 still. Each of the filesystems has its use cases, pros, and cons. It’s an improved version of the older Ext3 file system that includes a lot of great features, including ones for Solid State Drives (SSDS). 然而，对于纯数据存储，Btrfs可能要比EXT4好，但需要时间去证明。 到目前为止，EXT4似乎是桌面系统上更好的选择，因为它作为默认文件系统呈现，并且在传输文件时比Btrfs更快。Btrfs绝对值得研究，但要完全切换替换桌面 Linux桌面上的EXT4可能需要几. And I don't know if btrfs is right thing for my server. 7 - EXT4 vs. Compared to Ext4, XFS has a relatively poor performance for single threaded, metadata-intensive workloads. The reason that Ext4 is often recommended is that it is the most used and trusted filesystem out there on Linux today. 10. The fourth generation File System of the Ext (Extended) file system family. The chart below displays the difference in terms of hard drive space reserved for redundancy. - At least for Windows 8, Microsoft is. The only realistic benchmark is the one done on a real application in real conditions. BTRFS has less performance than EXT4 in quite a lot of situations, Valve probably just wanted the fastest+most robust option. It was also 164% faster in post-snapshot reads and 17% faster in post-snapshot writes. 5 (archived) Filesystems (ext3, reiser, xfs, jfs) comparison on Debian Etch Archived 2018-03-04 at the Wayback Machine (April 23, 2006) Block allocation strategies of various filesystems; What are the (dis)advantages of ext4, ReiserFS, JFS, and XFS? - Unix & Linux Stack ExchangeEXT4 is functional and is considered more stable. This is a significant difference: The Ext4 file system supports journaling, while Btrfs has a copy-on-write (CoW) feature. Compared to ext4, XFS has unlimited inode allocation, advanced allocation hinting (if you need it) and, in recent version, reflink support (but they need to be explicitly enabled in. In addition to performance, there are several other features to consider when choosing between Btrfs and Ext4. BTRFS is newer, and the performance is not as good in many cases, but it is not far off. 9 mins read. Filesystem for SSD disk: BTRFS vs NILFS2 vs EXT4: ruppertus: Linux - General: 10: 04-19-2012 12:19 AM: LXer: Linux 3. It features something like file self-healing. EXT4 is the successor of EXT3, the most used Linux file system. The check task is involves reading roughly 2000 small files in their entirety and performing some processor intensive tasks on them. g. 8 snapshot as of last week. I've also heard that LVM snapshots can. But btrfs is not by any stretch the default Linux file system. 2016 - Btrfs RAID 6 was already considered experimental, but was called out as dangerous and likely to corrupt data in several scenarios. I also don't think one can use any filesystem without worrying about data being corrupted. Ext4 is more mature, whereas Btrfs has features that should allow for greater resilience (and, in theory, should make it less susceptible to data corruption). This correlates with the previous experiment and the hypothesis. : Concurrent OperationsCurrently I'm running on LVM with SSD caching and ext4 fs. Linux supports a variety of file systems such as ext4, ZFS, XFS, Btrfs, Reiser4, and so on. 0, BTRFS is introduced as optional selection for the root. The fastest for the SATA/USB tests was XFS followed quickly by EXT4 and then F2FS. In this module, we would have a look at these two file systems in. To be clear, I am using RAID0 with two SSDs with strip size of 256Kb. I switched to BTRFS a few years ago just being curious about it. BTRFS claims to offer a lot (data-loss resiliency, self-healing if RAID, checksumming of metadata and data, compression, snapshots). This is from my own personal experience on the matter, which goes back a few years. With 4K random reads by FIO, the SATA/USB performance was flat across the. Btrfs automatically identifies data corruption, and if redundancy is available (raid1/10/5/6) will automagically self-heal. Os usuários de Windows e Mac OS X têm ainda menos motivos para procurar, porque eles realmente têm apenas uma opção para seu sistema - NTFS e HFS +, respectivamente. Ext4 fs can read and write to Ext2 or Ext3 file systems, but the Ext4 it is not compatible with Ext2 and Ext3 drivers. flexible inode. BTRFS . I don't think btrfs is faster than ext4 and the snapshot feature is not required for SteamOS, so I guess Ext4 is the obvious choice. A：BTRFS系能最差，不到20 seeks/sec. File-systems tested on the NVMe SSD included Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS, and NTFS. btrfs has the "btrfs-balance" command. Reasons why I use LVM/ext4: I'm used to it. 14 SSD Benchmarks With Btrfs vs. ext4 is a filesystem - no volume management capabilities. UDF, overall loser, at least is as consistent as ext4. 2. 4 SSD Benchmarks On EXT4, F2FS, Btrfs & XFS PostgreSQL performance on EXT4 and XFS | PostgreSQL Addict Some Quick Tests With ZFS, F2FS, Btrfs & Friends On Linux 4. File System. sandoxe • 3 yr. If you are running a more stable system like Dabian based Linux EXT4 is a better choice because it's faster file system but not as easy to revert. 6. The btrfs, many of us pronounce it different ways, as an example, Better FS, Butter FS, or B-Tree FS. Without new revolution, it stays where it is. XFS vs. I know very little about the file format but most articles im reading are suggesting Btrfs being preferred. BTRFS is a little slower than Ext4 in some circumstances, such as databases. I don't know anything about XFS (I thought unRaid was entirely btrfs before this thread) ZFS is pretty reliable and very mature. So mdraid+ext4 is probably a little bit safer. It will copy the data for you and then. LVM has snapshots. In this test, Btrfs outperformed LVM in every benchmark. Torn on filesystem for NAS mirror - ext4 vs btrfs. Nice video and a much-deserved push for BTRFS. And generally, files that arent compressible, wont be forcefully compressed. The btrfs exists because its developers firstly wanted to expand the file system functionality in order to include snapshots, pooling, as well as. Today we’re comparing Ext4 vs Btrfs filesystems in Linux. 4TB, and it loaded and migrated without a hitch up to the very latest DSM. In addition, ext4 supports volumes up to 1 EB (exabyte) and files up to 16 TB in. BTRFS is a modern copy on write file system natively supported by the Linux kernel, implementing features such as snapshots, built-in RAID and self healing via checksums for data and metadata. In my second round I made setups with btrfs on the nvme SSD and luks+btrfs on 2TB HDD as RAID1. Higher scores are better. But not enough users follow the guide on and instead do stuff that actually makes the system worse. Not just permissions, but moving them or getting file sizes, too. For zfs there is a plugin. Btrfs El sistema de archivos Btrfs nació como sucesor natural de EXT4, su objetivo es sustituirlo eliminando el mayor número de sus limitaciones, sobre todo lo referido al tamaño. Snapshot ini akan dibuat secara instan dan berukuran sangat kecil apabila dibandingkan dengan EXT4 yang. 2. Journaling chỉ được sử dụng khi ghi dữ liệu lên ổ cứng và đóng vai trò như những chiếc đục lỗ để ghi thông tin vào phân vùng. all kinds for nice features (like extents, subsecond timestamps) which ext3 does not have. Table of Contents When it comes to choosing a file system for your network-attached storage (NAS) device, there are two popular options to consider: Btrfs and. I want to create a RAID1 mirror for simplicity but don't know whether to opt for ext4 or btrfs. For my backup and personal file hosting usage, I ended up using BTRFS. . I agree with @raulfg3 . Btrfs also has snapshots so you can revert back to an earlier snapshot easily, say you run arch and some update borks your system (highly unlikely), you can simply revert back to the last good snapshot. Both volumes have sufficient space to allow me to move files from one volume to another. It does RAID like drive aggregation, LVM, and file system functions combined. So, Btrfs has built-in RAID support and therefore this feature is inherent in it. Perbandingan Fitur Sistem File Ext4 dan. EXT4: LXer: Syndicated Linux News: 0: 03-02-2012 12:20 PM: LXer: Btrfs Battles EXT4 With The Linux 2. Ini baru dibandingkan dengan sistem file Ext. Yes, Btrfs is not as well established as ext(4), and so there may be unknown risks. Is btrfs as fast as zfs or lvm with ext4? I heard it is not the fastest but great for capacity. Btrfs supports the conversion of ext2, ext3, or ext4 filesystems to Btrfs. BTRFS has better backup capabilities, but is considered less stable, despite it working for me just fine with my testing of it. If you don't have backups (note the 's' for plural) you don't have data. 1. I saw that Fedora is now using Btrfs filesystem by default. The reason that Ext4 is often recommended is that it is the most used and trusted filesystem out there on Linux today. BTRFS系统性能最差，下面是去掉该系统其它3种的对比. . I have dual booted Windows and Void linux into same SSD. LVM is a logical volume manager - it is not a filesystem. In Fedora's installer, for efi, I select "EFI System Partition"; for swap, it's just "swap"; but for root and home I don't know if I should select "ext4" or "btrfs". BTRFS dapat membuat snapshot dari sistem yang menggunakan BTRFS sebagai FileSystem-nya. Main features: Data protection features, including snapshot, replication, and point-in-time recovery. It you have huge hard drives, BTRFS supports up to 16 times larger size than 1 EXT4 partition. Now, open our file manager and extract the downloaded zip file using either 7zip or WinRAR. Synology actually makes this part fairly easy. Compression is usually not very efficient on game data (that is already compressed) and can increase fragmentation. 1) Support for huge files The Btrfs filesystem can support up to 2 64 bytes, which is the equivalent of 16EiB or exbibytes! Now that's a massive storage size! 2). 6：顺序. Perhaps, it's a faster processor. This is because BTRFS is optimized for handling small files, while EXT4 can struggle with multiple small files due to its delayed allocation. Choose btrfs only if ZF. All four mainline file-systems were tested off Linux 5. Hey fellow GNU/Linux enthusiasts, I'd like to know your opinions about using Ext4 vs BTRFS. This is the most desired feature of Btrfs. btrfs vs. Running this fio command, I get about 2. I had no bad experience myself with btrfs so far, but still have not tried it with anything more complex than raid1 over a long time and while I assume many horror stories out there are just deprecated as btrfs keeps improving, it can do a lot more than ext4. Benchmarking The Experimental Bcachefs File-System Against Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS & ZFS Storage : 2019-06-25: Optane SSD RAID Performance With ZFS On Linux, EXT4, XFS, Btrfs, F2FS Storage : 2019-06-20: Linux 5. It is the default file system in RHEL 6, Debian 7, Ubuntu 18 and so on. F2FS vs. Btrfs is always faster than ext4 when used with the nodatacow mount option. It can create a partition of a maximum of 8 EiB. LVM+EXT4 vs BTRFS. . For reducing the size of a filesystem, there are two purported wats forward, according to xfs developers. Neither of these are great options, but the latter features are actually kinda cool. However, btrfs excels at bulk data storage, media files, backup. F2FS vs. Find out which file system suits your needs best. This would be an interesting test. Indie games often too get fair amount of gain. EXT4 is better for small files and day to day use. J. EXT4 still performs better than BTRFS. Btrfs vs. Maybe adding Btrfs compression would be negligible outside of storage benchmarks. The EXT4 f ile system is 48-bit with a maximum file size of 1 exbibyte, depending on the host operating system. Both Btrfs and ZFS offer built-in RAID support, but their implementations differ. It supports enterprises that involve large programs with very huge databases. Now, right-click on the btrfs. It was time to do my quarterly disaster recovery drill, which involves bootstrapping my entire system from scratch using my scripts and backups. WunderTech. Because ext4 can't beat btrfs when it comes to snapshot/delete. If you don't need them ext4 is a good choice. Also BRTFS compresses the file system using less space compared to EXT4 but again the tradeoff is it uses more computer. So, if you’re having a hard time deciding whether to use the Ext4 filesystem or the Btrfs. XFS and EXT4 are common low-overhead / performance options, btrfs. ext4. 2 EXT4. Ext4 is probably the final evolution of the ext filesystem (which started with ext, then ext2, ext3, and now ext4). Enter the password of your DSM account and click Submit to confirm the removal of the. Btrfs delivers advanced capabilities like snapshots, data. the COW which saves alot of space and increases the speed. ext4 can claim historical stability, while the consumer advantage of btrfs is snapshots (the ease of subvolumes is nice too, rather than having to partition). Choosing Linux file system that is appropriate for your application is an important decision. Btrfs takes atomic snapshots (0b instantaneous snapshots that grow in size over time as you delete/edit files). By comparison, Ext4 does not have any FS compression, but you can enable this feature on Btrfs easily to squeeze more data out of it. Ext3 and ext4 have some very specific differences, which I'll focus on here. All of these Linux. Ext4. However with encryption it will be worse, as Synology still doesn't deploy proper full disk encryption. Any "scientific" explanation? BTFS with a posibility for a transparent compression just seems. 5" 1TB HDDs passed through as virtio devices to the OMV VM. The high RAM usage on ZFS is due to the ARC. ZFS so far has been a pain in debian. External links. When choosing a filesystem some of the factors that need to be considered include scalability,. The benchmark I linked attributes this to copy-on-write behaviour of btrfs. ファイルシステムが混在するのは出来る限り避けたい。. I think in many ways btrfs is the better filesystem, but I seem to have noticed that it takes longer to copy data than on ext4. However I see two things (a big one and a small one) in this video that could throw new users off the track: The big one: BTRFS doesn't have checksums, it has the option to have checksums, at least in the Synology integration. Ext4 is the default file system on most Linux distributions for a reason. I'ved tested compress=off/lz4, dedup=on/off and serveral Cache/Log constellations on 256GB SSD. Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS were tested in their out-of-the-box state / default mount options. Especially things that cause lots of file-internal fragementation like databases.