this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2025
-8 points (44.1% liked)

Linux

9008 readers
154 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Sorta related but these "next gen" FSs are pretty overrated on the performance benchmarks lots of groups like Phoronix do every kernel release.

BTRFS lags behind a ton compared to XFS, even though XFS was originally designed for large file throughput on servers.

Even EXT4 beats BcacheFS and BTRFS on several irl load benchmarks.

Only thing I've seen actually keep up is F2FS which iirc is the default on Android these days.

The point of these next gen file systems aren't raw performance, they are reliability, performance for specific cases, and reduced data usage. For example:

  • Copy on Write means it's very performant to create snapshots

  • incremental backups are much quicker

  • checksumming means the filesystem directly and reliably detects data corruption

  • built-in support for raid means a simplified setup and integration of scrubbing features into the filesystem, which can then take advantage of checksumming etc.

  • deduplication can automatically recognize duplicated data and as such reduce data use

These are things that tend to reduce performance, not increase it. Which is why, when performance on these filesystems stays the same or even increases, that's a major accomplishment.

load more comments (1 replies)