• lemmyreaderOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    I used to associate btrfs with the word unreliable for years based on what I’ve read here and there, while ext4 appears to be rock solid. Pointing to sources for this is not easy though. Here’s a start.

    See Features and Caveats here for Btrfs : https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Btrfs#Features

    For Ext4 https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Ext4

    ext4 (fourth extended file system) is an open source disk filesystem and most recent version of the extended series of filesystems. It is the primary file system in use by many Linux systems rendering it to be arguably the most stable and well tested file system supported in Linux.

    • TCB13@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      The “Caveats” section for BTRFS is trash, it is all about a ENOSPC issue that requires you to low level mess with the thing or run the fs for years over constant writes without any kind maintenance (with automatic defragmentation explicitly disabled). Frankly I can point from the top of my head real issues they aren’t speaking about: RAID56 (everything?), RAID10 (improve reading performance with more parallelization).

      If we take subvolumes, snapshots, deduplication, CoW, checksums and compression in consideration then there’s no reason to ever use ext4 as it is just… archaic. Synology is pushing for BRTFS at home and business so they must have analytics backing that as well.