Comparison of Linux filesystems
From LinuxReviews
Jump to navigationJump to searchPicking the right file-system can present some tough choices if your needs are specific. Here's an attempt to provide some insights into the various file-system's strengths and disadvantages.
Introduction[edit]
Our article A quick guide to Linux filesystems from 2004 is still very popular for some strange reason - even though it is not very useful to compare ext2 and reiserfs when none of those have been widely used in a decade. Thus; here is a an attempt to provide slightly more updated information.
| file-system | description | advantages | problems |
|---|---|---|---|
| ext4 | Solid file-system, default in most Linux distributions | All-round good file-system | Will by default reserve 5% of for root[1] |
| reiserfs | Was popular among Gentoo users | Very efficient for lots of small files | Hans Reiser murdered his family and went to jail. No more updates the next decade. |
| xfs | Solid file-system which has been around for 20+ years | Very efficient for large drives storing mostly larger files. | Can NOT be shrunk |
| zfs | Really advanced feature-rich file-system for large amounts of disks. | It's what you want if you have 10+ disks or more | It's NOT in the Linux kernel. *BSD is a better choice for zfs severs. You'll have to cross over to the dark side. From Ubuntu 20.04 onward, ZFS can easily be set up to be / |
This is a very controversial topic. Please feel free to share your opinion.
notes[edit]
- ↑ This is not really a major problem, you can reduce it to 1% with
tune2fs -m 1 /dev/device
Enable comment auto-refresher