And then I have formatted them with ext4, XFS and BTRFS. However, BTRFS had significantly better performance with small files than EXT4. It appears that ZFS may be a viable option, but do bear in mind to disable compression and encryption as they may impact performance. It has been suggested that ZFS may not be optimal for fread/fwrite operations, and it may be advisable to utilize ZFS for non-root directories while utilizing ext4 for the remainder of the system for optimal. The observation was that XFS is useful when your machine has multiple cores and fast disk that XFS can utilize. 24 0. 8. there were many tentatives to bring XFS on front, but, again, historically, there were always some issues as soon as workload became IO-bound. XFS is better in general with WT, as the MongoDB production notes suggest. EXT4 and XFS both use efficient lookup methods for file names, but if you ever need to run tools over the directories such as ls or find you will be very glad to have the files in manageable chunks of 1,000 - 10,000 files. NTFS. Writeback interval and buffer size. for data security and integrity zfs is the best. NTFS Benchmarks Continuing on from yesterday's Linux 4. 2. The problem with delayed allocation is data security. This is addressed in this knowledge base article; the main consideration for you will be the support levels available: Ext4 is supported up to 50TB, XFS up to 500TB. El sistema de archivos es mayor de 2 TiB con inodos de 512 bytes. Here are some more benchmarks. 6-pve1. When running MongoDB in production on Linux, you should use Linux kernel version 2. 5. Operating system: Raw-VM is Ubuntu 12. XFS . EXT4 performance is excellent. It scales with a number of controller replicas, which can bring extra. Filesystems – XFS/ext4/ZFS XFS. An anonymous reader writes "Phoronix has published Linux filesystem benchmarks comparing XFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs and NILFS2 filesystems. XFS allows multi-threaded concurrent journal commit while EXT4 has single threaded serial commit. Another test: everything is the same, upgraded kernel to 5. 1 Answer. So each file-system will be 10 TB. Unfortunately Synology uses ext4 and btrfs; no support for xfs out of the box. resource utilization; finally, the impact of. From what I read. So for a large video collection, I think I will stick with ext4 still. Offizieller Beitrag. It is faster with larger files. 14 stable, now it's time to do a Linux 3. I'm not sure if most are aware but Android is now using F2FS as the new filesystem type for the data partition instead of EXT4 after Google extensively tested the performance improvements and flash storage wear performance. The purpose of that patch was to help to improve read scalability in direct i/o mode. 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）。. Here are some alternatives: XFS. However, to fully exploit ext4's performance capabilities, files need to be restructured to use the extents storage mechanism, which isn't done automatically during the conversion. Both cases, a mechanical drive. being written when I compare the traces), when I look at a representative “same” action I see 5 ops on XFS…there are only 2 for the same action on EXT4. Figure 3 - Using psync engine with FIO* tool. The ext4 is an old file system that is the default in several Linux distributions, such as Ubuntu. 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. Btrfs uses a checksum to ensure that the data doesn’t corrupt, on the other hand, Ext4 doesn’t ensure data integrity. EXT4 is a legacy file system, and Btrfs represents future developments in the Linux space. However, unlike Extended 4, it is not possible to disable journaling, thus it can be iffy to use on an SSD. The server I'm working with is:2. Most versions of desktop Linux (known as distributions, or "distros" for short) default to the ext4 file system. The compression ratio of gzip and zstd is a bit higher while the write speed of lz4 and zstd is a bit higher. 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). The presented results were obtained by testing the performance ext4, xfs. After stepping through all pages in an article, it’d become apparent that each fs might perform better running certain tests. 4 usage of the XFS file system. ZFS is an advanced filesystem and many of its features focus mainly on reliability. doc_willis • 2 yr. Btfs not meant to replace ext4, they are in a different category, ext4 is simple, old and stable while btrfs brings new ideas and goes into very different direction. And you might just as well use EXT4. The host is proxmox 7. For example btrfs supports transparent file compression. XFS and EXT4 are common low-overhead / performance options, btrfs. So for a large video collection, I think I will stick with ext4 still. 2. Great for gaming machines. ext4 is the successor to ext3. One of the biggest differences between them is that their supported operating system. XFS was originally developed by Silicon Graphics for IRIX and later ported to Linux. XFS is a full 64-bit filesystem and in theory it is capable of handling filesystems as large as 8 Exabytes For Oracle Linux, we support up to 100TB. EXT3, EXT4, XFS EXT3 (2001) / EXT4 (2008) – evolution of original Linux file system (ext, ext2,. Earlier this month were the FreeBSD ZFS vs. Prior to EXT4, in many distributions, EXT3 was the default file-system. Btrfs native RAID was much faster for sequential writes than EXT4/XFS on Linux Software RAID. 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. Le système de fichiers ext4 est toujours pris en charge par Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 et peut être sélectionné au moment de l'installation. 3. To be honest I'm a little surprised how well Ext4 compared with exFAT ^_^. Here are my results. The ext4 filesystem supports larger files than its predecessor and can store up to 1 exbibyte (1. There are plenty of benefits for choosing XFS as a file system: XFS works extremely well with large files; XFS is known for its robustness and speed; XFS is particularly proficient at parallel input/output (I/O. See Sysctl#Virtual memory for details. Comparison of file archivers. Given. EXT4 has been the Linux default since 2006, following the previous EXT3. 10 using a common NVMe solid-state drive. com While Ext4 had good overall performance, ReiserFS was extreme fast at reading sequential files. If you're on HDD and you need the ability to shrink the fs, then use EXT4, but you lose any COW benefits. ext4 has proven to be a very robust file system, but it is made from an aging. Here are some of those XFS RAID benchmarks up against Btrfs and. EXT4 had the best speed at 58MB/s while Btrfs came in slightly behind. With not having the time to conduct the usual kernel version vs. LVM adds another layer which definitely does not make it more reliable. Si su aplicación falla con números de inodo grandes, monte el sistema de archivos XFS con la opción -o inode32 para imponer números de inodo inferiores a 232. To explicitly enable barriers, use barrier=1. Although XFS is good, in practice I've found ext4 to be slightly faster. 1. Generally, ZFS is known for having great performance. 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. You can sometimes run into bugs and issues if your home directory is partitioned in XFS, BTRFS, or ZFS. Ext4 is also a more traditional file system, while XFS provides more scalability and is better suited for large file systems. 04, see mkfs. XFS Storage : 2019-01-07: FreeBSD ZFS vs. ext4 and also reiserfs store files in a different way. xfs -l size=64m (notes from The performance is what you would expect for a linux kernel to mount a drive. I also have a separate zfs pool for either additional storage or VMs running on zfs (for snapshots). Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Performance Features" Collapse section "2. We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us. I'm pretty sure some of the higher performance ones. At 64 threads ext4 was even 47% faster (2362 tps vs. Because of that, the Ext4 file system is very stable. Probably those edge cases are not visible on an external USB hard drive, could be visible with external SSDs on a USB3. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Performance Features" 2. In this episode of the CyberGizmo I benchmark the 4 filesystems chosen by Phoronix for his testing and use my own workloads to compare. Off a Linux 5. As you can imagine there is not a single and. XFS also consumes about twice the CPU-per-metadata operation compared to Ext3 and Ext4, so if you have a CPU-bound workload with little concurrency, then the Ext3 or Ext4 variants will be. Small_Light_9964 • 1 yr. The XFS one on the other hand take around 11-13 hours!ZFS vs EXT4 for Host OS, and other HDD decisions. XFS does not require extensive reading. 0. To make the benchmarks above more clear, it might might help to normalise them relative to the performance of ext4 on each disk: ops randappend SMR. For this reason, I took the time to extend the same benchmark to Oracle ASM (Automatic Storage Management) and also to Oracle Enterprise Linux (OEL). It was first released in 2008 and serves as the successor to ext3. For really big data, you’d probably end up looking at shared storage, which by default means GFS2 on RHEL 7, except that for Hadoop you’d use HDFS or GlusterFS. Pros: Individual file size: 16GB to 2TB. 36 both EXT4 and XFS are – reliable file systems with a journal – proven by time and many production. It will make difference when there are other VMs on the same VMFS datastore. It has wider compatibility than NTFS, which means it's more likely to work with media players, consoles, and a variety of. At the time, ZFS was significantly slower than xfs and ext4 except when the L2ARC was used. Btrfs Benchmarks comparison, here is a wider look at mainline file-systems on the Linux 4. )It uses a default file system for Linux distribution, including Debian and Ubuntu. The ZFS file system combines a volume manager and file. g. but rather comparable to the usage of md-raid underneath or LVM. There are several benchmarks online attempting to compare XFS to ext4 with various RDBMS platforms and tools. Both VM’s are on a XFS based filesystem on the hypervisor. If you have single vmdk on dedicated VMFS I wouldn't expect any difference compare to RDM. The charts show sequential reads (top) and writes (bottom) on XFS (left) and EXT4. 8 release), there was also some interest by readers in seeing some XFS RAID tests side-by-side. It requires an ext4 or xfs backing filesystem. – in the case of SATA/SSD, the ext4 scalability issue has an impact on tps rate after 256 threads and drop is 10-15%. I developed an application recently and compared the I/O performance of both and found ext4 to be slightly quicker for my application which was really just opening and reading whole files into memory. AnthonyWC commented Dec 15, 2022. XFS. Defaults: ext4 and XFS. For a future article will be a look at non-mainlined file-systems, including ZFS On Linux. Some file system repairs have demonstrated up to a six-fold increase in performance. Both ext4 and XFS should be able to handle it. For more examples see the Markdown Cheatsheet. EXT4 I have no experience with, but XFS, despite all the hype, I think is better avoided. We may have lengthy talk on ext vs XFS vs f2fs and btrfs vs zfs and there are many more points to be mentioned, but for regular users. Btrfs is the recommended file system to use in most scenarios. EXT3, EXT4, XFS EXT3 (2001) / EXT4 (2008) – evolution of original Linux file system (ext, ext2,. I've read and have anecdotally (not scientific and could be affected by other things) experienced Btrfs being slower than ext4. If you use Debian, Ubuntu, or Fedora Workstation, the installer defaults to ext4. g. In many ways, Ext4 is a deeper improvement over Ext3 than Ext3 was over Ext2. Whilst it supposedly has advantages for dealing with larger files, this for me has always been eclipsed by the fact that you can't shrink xfs file systems. Fragmentation issue English Table of Contents Types of File Systems Local File Systems Overview The XFS File System The Ext File System Family Ext4 File System Choosing a Local File System Network File Systems Shared Storage File Systems Choosing Between Network and Shared Storage File Systems Conclusion Linux 5. Finally, at last, ZFS managed to outperform both EXT4 and Ubuntu. 0 mainline kernel and using the stock mount options. I ran performance benchmarks comparing XFS with EXT4 for MongoDB on AWS EC2 to find out exactly what you were wondering about. 24. I will use Ext4 until something more viable with at least the same level of stability takes its place. 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. It provides an unlimited subdirectory. After reading a few articles I decided to use JFS in favour of XFS. , not available on the GUI for now) that allows choosing a file system from a white list, defaulting to ext4. However, unlike Extended 4, it is not possible to disable journaling, thus it can be iffy to use on an SSD. Btrfs is one of the most. F2FS vs. 2) (surprisingly, the loopback benchmark looks better than the raw-disk benchmark, presumably because of the smaller size of the loopback device, thus less time is spent on the actual sync-to-disk) Benchmark setupDependending on the hardware, ext4 will generally have a bit better performance. ZFS is an amazing filesystem for long term storage, but terrible for performance/gaming. 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:. - No RAID. xfs: 0. Between EXT4 and XFS which file system is better when an application uses multiple threads to read/write large amount of small files on a SSD. ZFS meanwhile still handily beat out the UFS competition -- the Sun/Oracle ZFS was 53% faster than UFS+S and an impressive 2. Linux 5. Still, the filesystem is constantly called “high performance,” meaning it makes perfect sense to turn to this filesystem for high performance drives. Short answer: under GNU/Linux, you should use a GNU/Linux native file system, such as ext4, XFS or btrfs, as your root partition, for stability and security. ext4 is still a good filesystem, since it is rock stable and easy to recover from a crash. Recent File System Benchmarks - BTRFS XFX Ext4 F2FS. I’m a blockquote. 4935 2026 MB/s. xfs man page for additional information) 1: Example /proc/mdstat file with missing device:XFS, like Ext4, is a journaling filesystem. Application start up time benchmark and Sqlite benchmark are more representative of real world performance. XFS Storage : 2019-01-07: FreeBSD ZFS vs. BTRFS also had somewhat higher latency than EXT4, meaning that it took longer for files to be accessed on the file system. XFS vs. XFS supports maximum file system size of 8 exbibytes for the 64-bit file system. At 64 threads ext4 was even 47% faster (2362 tps vs. g. It was created as a successor to the ext3 file system and offers improved performance, reliability, and scalability. ext4 has better performance with large files. I have a RHEL7 box at work with a completely misconfigured partition scheme with XFS. However, we also must admit that Btrfs has many advantages that Ext4 doesn’t have, for example:For this round of testing on a Dell PowerEdge server with dual EPYC 7601 processors were using four Samsung 860 EVO SATA 3. It was created as a successor to the ext3 file system and offers improved performance, reliability, and scalability. It supports large file systems and provides excellent scalability and reliability. So in some cases there are no more free blocks and the filesystem is full. Compare your own system(s) to this result file with the Phoronix Test Suite by running the command: phoronix-test-suite benchmark 1608041-LO-LINUX44BT99XFS also consumes about twice the CPU-per-metadata operation compared to Ext3 and Ext4, so if you have a CPU-bound workload with little concurrency, then the Ext3 or Ext4 variants will be faster. 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. VM Memory and VCPU: Both VM’s have 2GB RAM and 1 VCPU of the same speed. Migrating from ext4 to XFS" Collapse section "3. So syncing is a real pain process, for a week or more. The most commonly used are Ext4, Btrfs, XFS, and ZFS which is the most recent file system released back in 2018. Seeking around those files which a DB will do may yield different. Phoronix: Linux 5. But I was more talking to the XFS vs EXT4 comparison. Multimedia Sanctuaries: With large files as daily bread, ext4 is indispensable. It provides good performance with SSD and supports the TRIM (and FITRIM) feature to keep good SSD performance over time (this clears unused memory blocks for quick later write access). Ext4 파일 시스템. El ext4 y xf. Ext4 is probably the final evolution of the ext filesystem (which started with ext, then ext2, ext3, and now ext4). • PCIe SSD devices designed based on the NVMe specification are called NVMe-based PCIe SSD’s • Provides a scalable host controller interface for devices in various form. The storage driver controls how images and containers are stored and managed on your Docker host. 0 File-System Benchmarks: Btrfs vs. also, i've heard in some other posts about btrfs not having the best stability for sudden power loss. Which one brings the best performance in an EXT4 vs XFS standoff? Truth is, each ZFS, BTRFS, XFS, or EXT4 file system – to only name the most popular ones – has pros and cons. This ext4 system has been in use for many years, so it is much improved from previous extensions and has greater bug removal support. XFS is obviously still a good choice despite its age. From this several things can be seen: The default compression of ZFS in this version is lz4. 5x faster than the common BSD UFS+J/UFS+S file-systems. 3 (1994) – 2000 - released under GPL – 2002 – merged into 2. XFS uses one allocation group per file system with striping. ), the better for efficient disk usage, in case there's a lot of small files on that partition. So I did two rounds: the. 18. XFS vs. Storage. As you can see from the results, the XFS filesystem allows for better writing capabilities to an SSD device. 3. XFS is another popular file system for Linux, especially for servers and high-performance applications. the fact that maximum cluster size of exFAT is 32MB while extends in ext4 can be as long as 128MB. 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. ZFS On Linux Benchmarks Storage : 2019-01-26: FreeBSD ZFS vs. XFS scales much better on modern multi-threaded workloads. After a week of testing Btrfs on my laptop, I can conclude that there is a noticeable performance penalty vs Ext4 or XFS. , not available on the GUI for now) that allows choosing a file system from a white list, defaulting to ext4. For storage, XFS is great and sometimes has higher. 2. The 3 types of file systems support large file size and volume size. Try to reformat that partition with the smallest block size: mkfs. The Ext4 file system is a very old file system and it has been used on the Linux operating system for a long, long time. 6. However, Ext3 lacks advanced file system features like extent blocking mapping, dynamic allocation inode, and defragmentation. Linux EXT4/Btrfs RAID With Twenty SSDs Storage : 2018-12-14: Linux RAID Benchmarks With EXT4 + XFS Across Four Samsung NVMe SSDs Storage : 2018-08-24 ZFS is an advanced filesystem and many of its features focus mainly on reliability. Picking a filesystem is not really relevant on a Desktop computer. XFS File. 0 mainline kernel and using. In sequential read performance, Btrfs and Bcachefs were terribly slow on the HDD while on the SSD Bcachefs was the slowest, just behind XFS while Btrfs and F2FS were competing for the. The benchmarks suggest XFS is the fastest filesystem for SSDs. ago. First, btrfs is a perfectly cromulent single-disk ext4 replacement. 10. Increased Performance of ext4 vs. HDFS on ext3 has been publicly tested on the Yahoo cluster, which makes it the safest choice for the underlying file system. Você deve ativar as cotas na montagem inicial. XFS sort donc grand vainqueur de cette comparaison avec ext4, et je ne peux que vous encourager à l’utiliser si vous voulez exploiter la base LEGI. Common Commands for ext3 and ext4 Compared to XFS. ext4 has been an improvement to the ext3 file system, which was an improvement over the ext2 file system before it. Share. Here are the major feature of BTFS over ext4. 6. The good news is that both ext4 and XFS facilitate excellent performance for database systems. Btrfs vs. Ext4 is an open-source, enhanced filesystem for Linux OSs that supersedes ext3 in terms of speed, dependability, and expansiveness. Ext4 is fast and rock solid, and easily recovered on a desktop machine if things go really bad. XFS. 3. Comparison of archive formats. 현재 Ext4는 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6의 기본 파일 시스템으로 단일 파일 및 파일 시스템 모두에서 최대 16 TB 크기 까지 지원합니다. So I recreated the benchmark fs as xfs and repeated the sysbench run. EXT4 is the successor of EXT3, the most used Linux file system. However, along with improvements in pure read workloads, it also introduced regression in intense mixed random read/write scenarios. Optane SSD RAID Performance With ZFS On Linux, EXT4, XFS, Btrfs, F2FS Storage : 2019-06-20: FreeBSD ZFS vs. Btrfs come with compression algorithms present in the filesystem, allowing data to be compressed at the filesystem level right when written to the system. On the SSD, Bcachefs came in behind EXT4 again but faster than Btrfs while XFS and F2FS were the fastest for SQLite on this consumer-grade SATA SSD. Differences Between Ext3/4 and XFS 4. 0 and today those results are being complemented by the solid-state drive results. 4% utilization. Another way to characterize this is that the Ext4 file system variants tend to perform better on systems that have limited I/O capability. e. Sorted by: 3. If you plan to use it exclusively on Linux, stick with a Unix file system, such as XFS or EXT4. XFS is about as mainline as a non-ext filesystem gets under Linux. Between 2T and 4T on a single disk, any of these would probably have similar performance. e. 10 using a common NVMe solid-state drive. all kinds for nice features (like extents, subsecond timestamps) which ext3 does not have. 1-based Bcachefs-dev kernel. While looking at the filesystem options it seems like BTRFS is a lot more stable than it was the last time I had to install arch so now I am seriously considering using it. It presents the. Mounting and Optimization: Once converted, the filesystem can be mounted as ext4. 7. 1 interface. Each volume is like a single disk file. This results in the clear conclusion that for this data zstd. We benchmarked XFS vs EXT4 file system on these storage devices as well. With a throughput of around 2,026 MB/s the XFS filesystem seems to offer the best writing speed. EXT4 is the successor of EXT3, the most used Linux file system. Copy link Member. XFS is a 64-bit journaling file system known for its high performance and efficient execution of parallel input/output (I/O) operations. Thus, if those who rely on CPU-bound workload with little concurrency work better and faster using Ext3 or Ext4. Hello everyone, The time has come again for me to reinstall arch once more. Recommended for general use. Hi folks, just wondering if anyone has experience with running clickhouse on ext4 vs xfs? And if there is any benchmark of ext4 vs xfs for clickhouse data volume? Specifically with high IOPS. XFS has features that make it suitable for very large file systems, supporting files up to 8EiB in size. BTRFS is basically the Linux version of ZFS (rather than just ZFS ported to Linux), but it still needs work around RAID. Posted by Dimitri Kravtchuk on Wed 13 May 2020 20:15 UTC Tags: innodb, Benchmarks, xfs, ext4, MySQL, Performance, DoubleWrite. 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. XFS: screams with enormous files, fast recovery time. ZFS is not yet ready. Btrfs Benchmarks comparison, here is a wider look at mainline file-systems on the Linux 4. If EXT4 is mounted with no barrier option (see. Also, it performs better on "server loads" (many parallel requests). #filesystem #ext4 #xfs #linuxExplicación de las diferencias entre sistemas de archivos, en este vídeo se comparan los 2 mas usados en GNU/Linux. After earlier in the week delivering solid-state drive file-system benchmarks in comparing the Linux 3. So I think you should have no strong preference, except to consider what you are familiar with and what is best documented. Taking the silver medal, ext3 impresses in the IOzone benchmark. Btrfs is one of the most popular newly created file systems, and was. You're going to run out of CPU and Memory long before disk reads/writes are going to start slowing you down. XFS was running the fastest with IOzone. ZoL Performance, Ubuntu ZFS On Linux Reference Storage : 2019-04-24: FreeBSD ZFS vs. my rough draft would be to offer an advanced option for the mount points (i. But if you're hoping to replace ZFS—or a more complex stack built on discrete RAID management, volume management, and simple. 현재 Ext4는 Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6의 기본 파일 시스템으로 단일 파일. F2FS vs. A filesystem is ext4 if it uses a feature that isn't in the ext3 driver, and ext3 if it isn't ext4 but uses a feature that isn't in the ext2 driver. With not having the time to conduct the usual kernel version vs. Published very recently by Phoronix, a series of benchmark tests. 15 FS performance to Linux 3. Now today I had a power outage on our office server and I discovered that one file on the JFS volume has been completely corrupted. It is because XFS consumes double the CPU-per-metadata operation compared to Ext3 and Ext4. . Performance of the FS usually only matters for some very specific corner cases like high performance databases, huge storage systems or whatnot. 0 causes performance drop in ~30-80%. 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. If you found this article helpful then do click on 👏 the button and also feel. The primary difference between the two is that Ext4 is more suitable for smaller storage devices, while XFS is designed for larger storage capacities. (Obviously we can't use Stratis itself unless it supports a mode that accounts for the top layer being controlled by domUs. • 2 yr. Januar 2020. Up to 8 threads xfs was few percent faster (~10% on average). My previous article on, EXT4 vs XFS for Oracle, generated some commentary both here in my blog and on Reddit. 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. 7. EXT4, XFS and ZFS comparison. Filesystems – XFS/ext4/ZFS XFS. EXT4 vs. With the same benchmark, very favorable to XFS, I added a ZFS L2ARC and that completely reversed the situation, more than tripling the ZFS results,. Ext3:according to some benchmark charts i've seen, btrfs has measurably worse performance than ext4. F2FS vs. However, LVM can provide great performance as well, especially when used with specific (good-performing) filesystems like XFS or Ext4. Last week I posted some fresh Linux file-system tests on a hard drive but for those preferring solid-state drives, here are some fresh benchmarks. As a general rule you've not really got enough space on a t2. IOSTAT also showing EXT4 was at 98. In terms of XFS vs Ext4, XFS is superior to Ext4 in the following. We recommend EXT4 or XFS. As cotas XFS não são uma opção remountable. Observations. XFS still has some reliability issues, but could be good for a large data store where speed matters but rare data loss (e. IMO XFS and F2FS seem like good choices for the most performance (F2FS was designed for SSDs). ago. EXT4 is better in the general case. Also, server raid originally md raid5 (4x4TB NAS drives) with XFS had taken all day to build, but creating btrfs-raid10 was seconds. Between EXT4 and XFS which file system is better when an application uses multiple threads to read/write large amount of small files on a SSD. At 32 threads ext4 was 28% faster (2345 tps vs. Or when it came to testing the single Seagate IronWolf 6TB HDD performance, Btrfs and EXT4 were performing about the same with.