Since then I have come to value tooling about as much as performance. Probably those edge cases are not visible on an external USB hard drive, could be visible with external SSDs on a USB3. Which is better largely depends on opinion. GameStop Moderna Pfizer Johnson & Johnson AstraZeneca Walgreens Best Buy Novavax SpaceX Tesla. A maximum. Btrfs is a bit slower with writes because of its Copy-on-write nature, but just as fast when it comes to reads. Regarding filesystems. 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). zfs not. I've seen benchmarks (eg: this one) that put btrfs considerably slower than ext4. " And it can be much faster than btrfs, especially with lots of smaller files. Because of this, and because EXT4 seems to have better TRIM support, my habit is to make SSD boot/root drives EXT4, and non-root bulk data spinning-rust drives/arrays XFS. Another point against btrfs is the insane amount of memory it uses. Use XFS for your array drives and Btrfs for your cache pool. BTRFS hatte auch etwas höhere Latenz als EXT4, was bedeutet, dass es länger dauerte, bis Dateien auf dem Dateisystem zugegriffen werden konnten. 7. Recommended for general use. Você pode então configurar a aplicação de cotas usando uma opção de montagem. 불가능. Both filesystems provide COW but XFS fragments less (and it's data cow only so no snapshots, only reflinks). Though not as large of a difference when comparing to an SD card. I hear zfs is good too. Updating 1 million files takes ages. EXT4 lacks more robust features but is stable and well-supported on all Linux operating systems. Have snapper to create pre/post BTRFS and LVM snapshots. Btrfs on SSD, XFS on HDD. Here are some key differences between them: XFS is a high-performance file system that Silicon Graphics originally developed. 0 SSD testing ran into a strange performance drop while Btrfs. Tl;dr: The best filesystem for Unraid. Windows has always been terribly slow to update, say, all file permissions in a large directory structure. So it has no barring. Đảm bảo dữ liệu khi backup. This article provides a detailed comparison of XFS vs btrfs to help you determine which file system is a better fit for your use case. Same as with ZFS. Btrfs is expected to offer better. Ext4 vs ext3. Bcachefs is the file-system born out of the Linux kernel's block cache code and has been worked on the past several years by. Back when Bcachefs debuted in 2015 I ran some initial. Both btrfs and zfs feel like the worst options considering their overhead. Ext4文件系统是Ext3的继承者，是Linux下的主流文件系统。经过多年的发展，它是目前最稳定的文件系统之一。但是，老实说，与其他Linux文件系统相比，它并不是最好的Linux文件系统。 在XFS vs Ext4方面，XFS在以下几个方面优于Ext4： I've seen benchmarks (eg: this one) that put btrfs considerably slower than ext4. Various internet sources suggest that XFS is faster and better, but taking into account that they also suggest that EXT4 is. This article provides a detailed comparison of the three file systems to help you decide which one is the best for your needs. We currently recommend XFS for production deployments. file-system comparison, here are some fresh benchmarks looking at the Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS file-system benchmarks on a speedy WD_BLACK SN850 NVMe solid-state drive. WD & Windows vs. Ext4, while. Use XFS for your array drives and Btrfs for your cache pool. This pre-dates xfsprogs 3. Btrfs, ZFS, and bcachefs are probably your best bets out of the 19 options considered. I've never had an issue with either, and currently run btrfs + luks. Linux provides the statx(2) system call interface for retrieving the file birth time for filesystems that support it since kernel version 4. 0 File-System. So now I can boot up into a snapshot. ago. Business, Economics, and Finance. Btrfs使用校验和来确保数据不会被破坏，另一方面，Ext4不能确保数据的完整性。 Btrfs提供了文件系统中存在的压缩算法，允许在将数据写入系统时在文件系统级进行压缩. If you have multiple disks — and therefore parity or redundancy from which corrupted data can theoretically be recovered — EXT4 has no way of knowing that, even less using it to your. With 4K random reads by FIO, the SATA/USB performance was flat across the. 数据场和大存储池会揭示关于 ext4、XCF 以及 btrfs 不同的场. ext4 with m=0 ext4 with m=0 and T=largefile4 xfs with crc=0 mounted them with: defaults,noatime defaults,noatime,discard defaults,noatime results show really no difference between first two, while plotting 4 at a time: time is around 8-9 hours. Hey Guys! Welcome to XPSTECH. 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. Ext4 has some scalability and performance issues when dealing with large or fragmented files or directories. wiki. In terms of XFS vs Ext4, XFS is superior to Ext4 in the following. you don't have to think about what you're doing because it's what. Various benchmarks have concluded that the actual ext4 file system can perform a variety of read-write operations faster than an NTFS partition. 1. I've set up and used btrfs for years and later zfs for the past few years both professionally and on home servers. Additional mount points using Btrfs will also have corresponding subvolumes created based on the Name field. I am getting too many input/output errors with my 3TB HDD NTFS hard disk for main files. The only realistic benchmark is the one done on a real application in real conditions. However, the performance of ZFS on FreeBSD/PC-BSD 8. If you have a NAS or Home server, BTRFS or XFS can offer benefits but then you'll have to do some extensive reading first. Is XFS better than btrfs? September 30, 2023 by Garry. Btrfs is not a successor to the default Ext4 file system used in most Linux distributions, but it can be expected to replace Ext4 in the future. For example btrfs supports transparent file compression. It's the fastest option bar none if you have enough RAM. File-systems tested on the NVMe SSD included Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS, and NTFS. Phoronix has a ton of reviews, Google for them. If you do hardware RAID, with a dedicated RAID card, just do not use ZFS please, it will break your data at some point. FYI: btrfs. To have best performance use noatime mount option, and I also recommend to use mount option. That filesystem is now xfs. A number of Phoronix readers have been asking about some fresh file-system comparisons on recent kernels. Granted, i just use the automatic partition creater at setup, so it still uses ext4 for the /boot and /boot/efi partitions. This would be an interesting test. mount the recently formatted btrfs partition without special options just with mount /dev/nvme0n1p2 /mnt and create the subvolumes you want, e. Btrfs和Ext4都是优秀的文件系统，但在选择时需要考虑您的具体需求和使用场景。. I've heard good things about BTRFS, and I'd use XFS but I dislike that it takes an significant % of the free-space off the bat. file-system comparison, here are some fresh benchmarks looking at the Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS file-system benchmarks on a speedy WD_BLACK SN850 NVMe solid-state drive. Small to Medium Enterprises: While ext3 suffices for businesses with modest data needs, scalability visionaries would do well considering ext4. I've compiled in tmpfs for over a decade now. 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). Ext4 has some scalability and performance issues when dealing with large or fragmented files or directories. On the other hand, backup of xfs to xfs allows you certain features that. If it is only about reliability and you're in doubt, go with ext4, imho. A continuación, os vamos a explicar brevemente las principales características de EXT4 y de Btrfs. The mount command for ext4 has the "stripe" option. For anything with higher capability, XFS tends to be faster. XFS for data, because XFS is a damn good filesystem for data and doesn't have the few edge cases that btrfs does where it sometimes isn't the best filesystem for certain profiles for example, databases, lots of tiny writes have a sometimes will slow down a btrfs filesystem. and probably also not xfs. 1 million iops for ext4, right in line with the spec of the drive times 2,. For reducing the size of a filesystem, there are two purported wats forward, according to xfs developers. What takes up space is each consecutive data change, that is why snapshots are created instantaneously. Hello everyone, The time has come again for me to reinstall arch once more. but for the shared servers with many users you might consider xfs for the parallel IO and number of files. Já que muitos usuários Linux, que desejam experimentar o novo sistema, vêm do Ext4, faz sentido enumerar alguns pontos que realçam as diferenças entre os dois: O Ext4 ainda é a melhor escolha, no desktop do usuário comum — por ser mais rápido na transferência de arquivos e por ser mais maduro6,861. Subvolumes do not have a size, so the Desired. Regarding filesystems. XFS is a robust and mature 64-bit journaling file system that supports very large files and file systems on a single host. Btrfs' RAID on Linux 5. Now I may send the snapshots also to an local device (formatted in Btrfs). Reviews of EXT4, EXT3, XFS, BTRFS, and ZFS. Your gaming performance shouldn't be affected by either, since games are mostly just reads anyways. 1 Overview of File Systems in Linux. When comparing XFS vs EXT4, XFS also offers unlimited inode allocation, advanced allocation hinting (in case you need it), and, in recent versions, reflink support. Btrfs lacks maturity and stability at the time of this writing but is more feature-rich compared to EXT4. However ZFS does come at one major downside, it needs more resources in just about every way one can imagine, ZFS is best with more disks, more RAM, more CPU, more Bandwidth, more SSD’s for caching…. But I was more talking to the XFS vs EXT4 comparison. And xfs. Downside is that it's a slower file system due to it's nature of redundancy. - no encryption. However, when we review EXT4 vs BTRFS, here’s the downside: BTRFS has disk and volume management built-in, while EXT4 is a “pure filesystem”. If you wish to run ext4, xfs or btrfs then you need to run a linux OS not BSD. 0-040700-generic (x86_64) Unity 7. Although Btrfs lacks stability and maturity as of this writing, it is more feature-rich than EXT4 despite this. Обзор Ext4 vs Btrfs vs XFS. g. Pro: supported by all distro's, commercial and not, and based on ext3, so it's widely tested, stable and proven. ZFS is great but heavy/complex, and lack of block pointer rewrite can be painful. This process have two main steps: 1. Interestingly, the first version of the Ext4 filesystem, the Extended filesystem (“Ext”), came out in 1992 for the Minix OS. Features of the XFS and ZFS. Thanks again! Unless you're doing something crazy, ext4 or btrfs would both be fine. 其實你提到一個重點了. 如果您追求高度的数据完整性和强大的快照功能，Btrfs可能是更好的选择。. The XFS supports more file sizes and greater file or partition sizes. 5. exFAT is the best choice at the moment. Using Btrfs, just expanding a zip file and trying to immediately enter that new expanded folder in Nautilus, I am presented with a “busy” spinning graphic as Nautilus is preparing to display the new folder contents. g. Perhaps btrfs is much better for SSDs, but in oldschool HDDs I. Phoronix: Linux 4. EXT4 vs. ago. ago. I use ext4 everywhere. 4 To 4. However benchmarks test quite narrow parameters which may not be reflected by running an OS. Especially things that cause lots of file-internal fragementation like databases. Because ext4 can't beat btrfs when it comes to snapshot/delete. If you omit the size parameter, a journal size based on the size of the file system is used. Unless you're doing something crazy, ext4 or btrfs would both be fine. Файловая система Ext4 это улучшенная версия Ext3, которая, в свою очередь, не что иное, как переработанная Ext2. with mirrored pairs, you also have the option of. With disks as fast as NVMe you probably won't notice much difference in drive speeds between btrfs, f2fs, ext4, etc unless you have some extremely disk-bound workload. Tính năng sao chép dữ liệu. Never use ReiserFS on a new system and if you are currently using it, consider converting it to XFS or Btrfs. The checking task improved 14,6 %. Use xfs_info to verify that the ftype option is set to 1. Mount ntfs drives only read only. Both cases, a mechanical drive. Now I may send the snapshots also to an local device (formatted in Btrfs). Both are good file systems. I have 6 disks so I have created 3 logical disks, 2 SSDs each - just for testing. Because of that, the Ext4 file system is very stable. Ext4: cũng giống như Ext3, lưu giữ được những ưu điểm và tính tương thích ngược với phiên bản trước đó. (當然另一種做法是新增硬碟, 另外格式化為 btrfs. 3 which makes XFS v5 the default and all the benefits it brings. , power failure) could be acceptable. BTRFS vs EXT4 speed and compression. . After a week of testing Btrfs on my laptop, I can conclude that there is a noticeable performance penalty vs Ext4 or XFS. Not a ton of bells and whistles, but they Just Work. I have 6 disks so I have created 3 logical disks, 2 SSDs each - just for testing. Data Colossi & Data Centers: Ext4 is non-negotiable for handling extensive data transactions. With all of the major file-systems seeing clean-up work during the Linux 4. However benchmarks test quite narrow parameters which may not be reflected by running an OS. What we mean is that we need something like resize2fs (ext4) for enlarge or shrunk on the fly, and not required to use another filesystem to store the dump for the resizing. If you're looking to warehouse big blobs of data or lots of archive and reporting; then by all means ZFS is a great choice. 4 EXT4 / XFS / Btrfs RAID Performance On Four HDDs Storage : 2019-12-28: 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. ) TL, DR: All 3 major next gen CoW file systems have their advantages and drawbacks, and I figure integrating them into my workflow is the only way to fairly evaluate them see how they work for myself. The benchmark results of three most common file systems under Linux environment were given in this paper. XFS and ext4 aren't that different. Snapraid says if the disk size is below 16TB there are no limitations, if above 16TB the parity drive has to be XFS because the parity is a single file and EXT4 has a file size limit of 16TB. But yeah, it's (BTRFS) a more complex filesystem with a bottomless pit of asterisks and gotchas attached to it, EXT4 is much more limited in scope and much simpler from a design perspective. checksum verification on each file. one of the still “beta” features of btrfs. We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. Each one might work for you based on YOUR needs! Supp. I've used EX4, XFS, EXT4+LVM and now I'm under BTRFS, and I can tell you, TF2, CSGO, Factorio, KSP, etc, all perform the same under all of them. If you think that you need. No such built-in compression support is in Ext4. BTRFS also had somewhat higher latency than EXT4, meaning that it took longer for files to be accessed on the file system. The use of checksums in Btrfs can prevent silent data corruption. It's a mature filesystem and offers online defragmentation and can. My problem is that in some games when DXVK is running in Linux, stutters occur, although there are no such problems on Windows. There was a higher risk than upon disconnection or loss of power than some of the files are truncated. OpenSUSE hiện sử dụng btrfs làm tùy chọn mặc định cho phân vùng /root, nơi đặt hệ điều hành. Comparing the two is a semi-futile exercise. In a significant data corruption, Ext2 and Ext3 file systems are more possible and easy to recover data due to their data redundancy compared with Ext4. btrfs 可以支援 snapshot, 但 ext4 不行, 如果一開始就採用 ext4, 日後如果要使用 snapshot 功能, 必須將 NAS 的資料備份出來, 重新 format 成 btrfs 格式. file-system comparison, here are some fresh benchmarks looking at the Btrfs, EXT4,btrfs is also slower in some benchmarks but I very much doubt thats visible in normal use. ext4 is an "advanced" version of ext3 with various improvements, basically an upgrade to the ext3 format. Just EXT4, yes. btrfs sub cr /mnt/@ (the @ alone is the convention for "root directory" in btrfs) btrfs sub cr /mnt/@home. I converted my ext4 disks (3 x ssd + 1 x hdd) to btrfs, and all was well. Small to Medium Enterprises: While ext3 suffices for businesses with modest data needs, scalability visionaries would do well considering ext4. ZFS brings robustness and stability, while it avoids the corruption of large files. 和 ext4 和 XFS 一起使用的工具比较 法律通告 Settings Close. I'd say ext, because it is faster, and because you asking means, that you don't know how to use btrfs features, otherwise the choice is obvious: need snapshots -> btrfs, need reflinks -> XFS, default -> ext4. wbeater • 3 yr. XFS vs EXT4!This is a very common question when it comes to Linux filesystems and if you’re looking for the difference between XFS and EXT4, here is a quick summary:. But according to tests in all scenarios, XFS is better than EXT4, it's a pity that there are no tests in games. As well as btrfs. XFS vs. This is fundamental in determining the file system’s capacity. The BTRFS RAID is not difficult at all to create or problematic, but up until now, OMV does not support BTRFS RAID creation or management through the webGUI, so you have to use the terminal. Between 2T and 4T on a single disk, any of these would probably have similar performance. Multimedia Sanctuaries: With large files as daily bread, ext4 is indispensable. org and zfsonlinux. Btrfs（技术预览） Expand section "6. Reasons why I use LVM/ext4: I'm used to it. Tuy nhiên, đối với phân vùng /home chứa các file cá nhân, openSUSE đã quyết định sử dụng hệ thống file XFS thay thế. Performance: Ext4 performs better in everyday tasks and is faster for small file writes. A daily snapshot of Ubuntu 19. On a single-drive system, performance wise ext4 is what the user wants. EXT4 has been the Linux default since 2006, following the previous EXT3. 0 SSD drive used was a 250GB Samsung 850 PRO solid-state drive connected both. 7. Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS were tested in their out-of-the-box state / default mount options. BTRFS have some fancy features, and could help you manage your disk better in some automation-future-proof way. Also, on ZFS, in Linux, it takes some tweaking to get it performing good, so I would suggest to go btrfs or XFS. 7. 04 Disco Dingo was running on the Threadripper setup while using the Linux Git kernel from the mainline PPA. In this tutorial, we will check Btrfs against Ext4 filesystem, and seek to understand their functionalities, strengths, and weaknesses. But none of these will be relevant to a bog standard use case like "browsing the internet and sometimes. XFS 和 ext4 的比较. 重新定义 btrfs 文件系统大小 6. 8 snapshot as of last week. It self-describes as "stable", as of. The only case where XFS is slower is when creating/deleting a lot of small files. One of the main reasons the XFS file system is used is for its support of large chunks of data. . The SATA 3. Ext4中没有这种内置的压缩支持。 Btrfs直接从磁盘删除重复数据，而Ext4不能这样做， Btrfs支持. EXT4 Vs XFS. 0 hard drive when using EXT4 and XFS. EXT4 is better for small files and day to day use. file-system comparison, here are some fresh benchmarks looking at the Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, and XFS file-system benchmarks on a speedy WD_BLACK SN850 NVMe. XFS与Ext4性能比较. both are great choices, but for me the more generally useful choice is BTRFS. ext3 is the most common format. Thanks. Under Compile Bench, EXT4 was the fastest on all three drives followed by a mix of XFS and F2FS. Ext4 and XFS are the fastest, as expected. How do the major file systems supported by Linux differ from each other? Compared to Ext4, XFS has a relatively poor performance for single threaded, metadata-intensive workloads. In some areas Btrfs was showing great improvements in performance, especially for the RAID setup, but it still lacked in some other areas. Now Fedora just needs to implement it properly like openSUSE. btrfs is da bomb yo. Rather then using BTRFS, I would use XFS and hope for the best, or using dm-integrity. 2. Dropping performance in case with 4 threads for ext4 is a signal that there still are contention issues. 3. In this episode of the CyberGizmo I benchmark the 4 filesystems chosen by Phoronix for his testing and use my own workloads to compare and contrast them. But shrinking is no problem for ext4 or btrfs. Perhaps btrfs is much better for SSDs, but in oldschool HDDs I. XFS vs Btrfs. For personal and SOHO use, EXT4 is the most commonly used file system in Linux systems. EXT4は、Linuxベースのオペレーティングシステムのメインファイルシステムです。Complexity: btrfs is a more complex file system than ext4, and may require more advanced knowledge and expertise to manage and maintain. 3. . Furthermore, the Ext4 is designed to be backward compatible. Btrfs is the recommended file system to use in most scenarios. For anything with higher capability, XFS tends to be faster. (2013) compared the performance of Btrfs against XFS and ext4. Performance: Ext4 performs better in everyday tasks and is faster for small file writes. Each of the five file-systems were tested on the same NVM Express SSD from the Linux 4. EXT4 is very low-hassle, normal journaled filesystem. 1. • 3 mo. To be clear, I am using RAID0 with two SSDs with strip size of 256Kb. The only concern I have is performance, maybe btrfs in a HDD will be really slow. 2. Improve this answer. It supports large file systems and provides excellent scalability and reliability. Also, reducing the life of my SSD by a month is worth winning an argument from which I get absolutely no benefit. EXT4 vs. Linux 5. Running AIO-Stress on the Western Digital VelociRaptor was yielding speeds not technically possible for the Serial ATA 3. Though EXT4 has few strong capabilities, it is reliable and well-maintained across all Linux operating systems. Partition Size: Ext4 supports partition size up to 1 EiB, while Btrfs supports partition size up to 16 EiB. what i found is that ext3 lost around 5-10 files out of every million, XFS around 5-30 per million and both Reiser and JFS went to several hundreds, a thousand lost files in at least one case. Main features: Data protection features, including snapshot, replication, and point-in-time recovery. This section highlights the differences when using or administering an XFS file system. XFS still has some reliability issues, but could be good for a large data store where speed matters but rare data loss (e. A Seagate FireCuda 520 PCIe 4. Modern Linux filesystems, such as ext4, Btrfs and JFS, do store the file creation time (aka birth time), but use different names for the field in question (crtime in ext4, otime in Btrfs and JFS). The only benefit of btrfs that I could find was marginally easier setup and the software license. In the time since I chose ext4 for these systems, btrfs seems to have come a long way, so the choice may be harder today. This is why XFS might be a great candidate for an SSD. Ext2 → Ext3 → Ext4. It can hold up to 1 billion terabytes of data. You didn't provide the Linux distribution information, but assuming CentOS or Red Hat, XFS is now somewhat integrated. Ext3 and Ext4 perform better on limited bandwidth (< 200MB/s) and up to ~1,000 IOPS capability. 4. zfs or btrfs or ext4. NTFS. It also recovers from power failure easily, with the journaling system. Btrfs vs ext4 . If, for example, most your data writes are file add (like storing your camera roll, your movie collection,etc), btrfs snapshots will use virtually no extra space. They both use delayed allocation to achieve file fragmentation while both do not support mounted snapshots. Btrfs, EXT4, XFS, F2FS, and NILFS2 were tested on a Linux 5. Diferenças básicas entre o Ext4 e o Btrfs. Approach 2: Readjust things so the kernel and modules are on an ext4 filesystem and the data you most want to compress is on a btrfs partition. Ext4文件系统是Ext3的继承者，是Linux下的主流文件系统。经过多年的发展，它是目前最稳定的文件系统之一。但是，老实说，与其他Linux文件系统相比，它并不是最好的Linux文件系统。 在XFS vs Ext4方面，XFS在以下几个方面优. Using: - A full partition in a single 1TB or 2TB NVMe SSD. to cut a long story short: If you want a common file storage between Unix and windows, exFAT is the best choice at the moment. Using multiple drives of varying sizes created a luks1 encrypted ‘single’ data and dup meta volume. Tbh, it depends on game by game basis Team Fortress 2 will go as low as nearly 50%, same for KSP. Theodore Ts’o, a maintainer for Ext3 and later, Ext4, has stated that he sees Btrfs as a better way forward than continuing to rely on the ext* technology. because it spans multiple partitions, it's less likely to fill up your hard drive. There are results for “single file” with O_DIRECT case (sysbench fileio 16 KiB blocksize random write workload): ext4 1 thread: 87 MiB/sec. Snapraid says if the disk size is below 16TB there are no limitations, if above 16TB the parity drive has to be XFS because the parity is a single file and EXT4 has a file size limit of 16TB. EXT4 vs. XFS as a similar featureset filesystem manages around 99. Both are suitable for everyday use, but it's worth noting that ext4 partitions. XFS is more and more mature than Btrfs, but. 0 mainline kernel and using the stock mount options. But they come with the smallest set of features compared to newer filesystems. For BTRFS, the overall throughput is fairly low (~30k tps), while the jitter is somewhat better and worse than for EXT4/XFS at the same time. 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. Back when Bcachefs debuted in 2015 I ran some initial. So I moved everything off of it and formatted it into XFS and ate the 0,5% space loss for peace of mind. EXT4 being the “safer” choice of the two, it is by the most commonly used FS in linux based systems, and most applications are developed and tested on EXT4. 但无论如何，各个文件系统都需要存储这三类信息，因为这是内核规定的（见下）。. 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. 암호화 기능. For more than 3 disks, or a spinning disk with ssd, zfs starts to look very interesting. Yes, both BTRFS and ZFS have advanced features that are missing in EXT4. Example: Dropbox is hard-coded to use ext4, so will refuse to work on ZFS and BTRFS. After conversion I: enabled compression. It supports large file systems and provides excellent scalability and reliability. ZFS is an advanced filesystem and many of its features focus mainly on reliability. Ext4 is the default system for most Distros. The benchmark I linked attributes this to copy-on-write behaviour of btrfs. Btrfs provides checksums for data and metadata, ensuring enhanced data integrity. You can hot swap drives without rebooting, remove failed drives, swap in a larger drive and remove the smaller one, all without preparing ahead of time to do so. Looking at benchmarks however it seems to have poor. File-systems tested on the NVMe SSD included Btrfs, EXT4, F2FS, XFS, and NTFS. In Summary, ZFS, by contrast with EXT4, offers nearly unlimited capacity for data and metadata storage. Btrfs vs. EXT4. On the other hand, for Linux/Unix-based devices, it might be a bit of a challenge choosing one among many options. You can see several XFS vs ext4 benchmarks on phoronix. Overall, except for application launch time, benchmark results show that ZFS is the slowest file system in terms of read and write speed due to its COW operating type, while EXT4 is usually the fastest system. Let’s go through the different features of the two filesystems. On the other hand, EXT4 handled contended file locks about 30% faster than XFS. Here are a few other differences: Features: Btrfs has more advanced features, such as snapshots, data integrity checks, and built-in RAID support.