Time to start an argument on here but I feel like it’s necessary just so we have a hub for this. but
0 voters
I’ve been a Gentoo user for many years now and I’ve personally used XFS and f2fs but what say ye? which filesystem do you use and why?
Ext4 on workstations, ZFS on server.
Ext4 is easy mode which I’ll often go for on a workstation just so I have one less thing to think about.
I’ve always been a fan of speed hence why I use Gentoo. but back when I was first using linux i stood with the default ext4. then started exploring till I settled with F2FS
You’re not faster because you run gentoo. You are not faster because you run F2FS
Linux is linux you just need to configure things correctly. That said, honestly there’s no real reason to use anything other than BTRFS and EXT4 comes to standard OS drives. When it comes to a raid setup, you basically should just choose ZFS. The exception is the OS drive where you have the options of ZFS root or Mirrored BTRFS Setups.
Can you tell I am a fan of redundancy?
But also LOL at your poll basically confirming that so far
the whole point of this thread was to start a discussion for what people use and why? everyone is different not why I think F2FS is great.
You literally prefaced it in the lounge as the biggest fight of all time. Forgive me if I don’t entirely take you seriously.
Dan said there’s not very many reasons to use the other file systems these days. I do know that a lot of the reasons why XFS is still doing well is because of the enterprise. In certain places it’s just useful to have a really high performant journaling file system. I haven’t heard many arguments for the use of F2FS even speed people are willing to trade the very small benefit it gives them. A lot of the other file systems have also absorb those features into themselves, so it’s curious to me that F2FS still has a following. I’d actually want to know the concrete reasons why you think it’s great. I know that you didn’t create the thread for that, but it would be somewhat interesting.
Because it’s the Linux community and people are very divisive on what they use. hence you right now
I’m not being very divisive I’m just sticking with the three sigma normal. Using a special file system. I remember why I did that when I had no other better reason to do it. It’s because I felt special and it’s because it ran something different than everybody else. Hence, Linux communities in general
They’re just really isn’t a reason to run anything other than the two that are in the top of your poll. I’d love to hear him though. I’m not going to say that they’re bad reasons. I’m just saying most of the features that everybody needs in a file system are in those two and if you need a little bit more, well ZFS has got your back
Inb4 ReeeeeeFS
hence why I made this thread. everyone is different.
BTRFS and CoW ftw. Too much convenience features to not use it. Is available as root and on most distributions. I don’t use non-CoW filesystems anymore.
Single disk or RAID 0/1/10, root partition == BTRFS
larger pools with parity raid == ZFS
I use zfs on a single disk for the efficiency. There is really no alternative when you want peak performance.
I have ZFS running on my laptop (very convenient ZFS on root via Ubuntu Installer) and the efficient caching on the ARC instead of page cache is certainly a thing worth mentioning. You don’t need peak performance on drive access if everything is coming from memory.
NVME ain’t got shit on DRAM
^^^ LOL 
I’m using JFS (you forgot that 
). I used XFS for a while, but at the time the XFS tool set wasn’t complete (you couldn’t resize a partition, IIRC) so after reading a comparison between the various Linux file systems at the time (ReiserFS was still a thing then) from a reputable (local) magazine I choose JFS instead. Marginally less performance over XFS when it came to file handling but with a complete tool set.
I’m on Devuan, but have used Debian (pre-systemd releases) and Funtoo (cutting-edge Gentoo, really) in the past. Prior to Debian I used RH8, RH9, SUSE and even (shudder) Win98SE 
I see people running praises on ZFS, but from what I understand (basically what Linus explained and he probably cut quite a few corners here) ZFS stores files on a single drive with meta-data on a different drive, so I don’t see any redundancy in that. My primary server runs a RAID6 and given its workload that suffices but I understand high-performance systems suffer too much from the double-parity calculation write times to be viable. That’s fine, but on BTRFS I can’t run RAID6. Nor RAID5 for that matter, and I really want the redundancy in drives.
That is one of the many (optional) features of the objectively superior ZFS.
Sorry, I’m not buying that. Like I said, Linus explained this in several of his videos and he likely cut some corners, so enlighten us on the full potential of ZFS then 
fwiw, I’ve got a gentoo install in my desktop btrfs (along with several *buntus). I moved it there from an ext3 partition. A two-line custom.cfg grub entry is all that’s needed.
Heres a boring answer: ext4 cause idc lol
I am a fan of ZFS, but it is not the right fit for everything.
So, I would say, choose for the task.
If your OS will be stable with F2FS, then it should (in theory) be the best, as it’s kinda built for flash? (rip D5/DSSD and the amazing 3d parity flash)
I use boring older FS’s for my boot drives, and where I can, I often use ZFS for data, but even though it works fine in limited spec machines like pi’s, and on beefy machines, doesn’t mean you wanna give up a chunk of RAM just for a FS.
I’m surprised there are so many Btrfs replies, people are brave.
XFS is the best specified, coded and tested of all the file systems mentioned imo.
