Just a simple question : Which file system do you recommend for Linux? Ext4…?

EDIT : Thanks to everyone who commented, I think I will try btrfs on my root partition and keep ext4 for my home directory 😃

        • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          File system is a core component of any electronic system. Even if it’s just 1% less stable than other ones, it’s still less stable. Maybe it’s faster in some cases and supports better backups but ehh idk if it’s worth it. Losing documents is something you probably want to avoid at all costs

          • 2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, but it isn’t noticeably “less stable” if at all anymore* unless you mean stable as in “essentially in maintenance mode”, and clearly good enough for SLES to make it the default. Stop spreading outdated FUD and make backups regularly if you care about your documents (ext4 won’t save you from disk failure either which is probably the more likely scenario).

            * not talking about the RAID 5/6 modes, but those are explicitly marked unstable

            • boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              My short BTRFS history

              1. Installed on a 1TB NVME
              2. used for 2 years
              3. Rebased my system a ton, used rpm-ostree a ton (which uses BTRFS for the snapshots I think?)
              4. Physically broke the SSD by bending (lol used a silicon cooler pad but it bent it) which resulted in hardware crashes
              5. With dd barely managed to get all the data onto a 1TB SATA SSD
              6. dd-ed the SATA SSD onto a 2TB NVME
              7. deleted and restored the MBR, resized the BTRFS partition to max, resized the BTRFS filesystem to max, balanced it

              Still works, never had a single failure

      • Mereo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I disagree. My partition is ext4, but Timeshift saved my ass when an upgrade went wrong. I just had to restore the system from a previous snapshot taken before the upgrade.

        • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Of course updates can break stuff. What I don’t understand is why would you intentionally go for a less stable FS that can break and corrupt all files? It’s especially bad on old machines with limited space where full backups are not possible

  • Adanisi@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    ext4 has been battle-tested for many years and is very stable. Doesn’t have the same fragmentation and data loss issues certain other filesystems like NTFS have.

  • Mereo@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    In my opinion, it depends. If a distro has BTRFS configured to automatically take a snapshot when upgrading (like OpenSuse Tumbleweed), then BTRFS.

    If not, for a beginner, ext4 + timeshift to take snapshots of your system in case an upgrade goes wrong will be fine.

  • Yozul@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Honestly, unless there’s some specific thing you’re looking for just use your distro’s default. If your distro doesn’t have a default I’d probably default to ext4. The way most people use their computers there’s really no noticeable advantage to any of the others, so there’s no reason not to stick with old reliable. If you like to fiddle with things just to see what they can do or have unusual requirements then btrfs or zfs could be worth looking into, but if you have to ask it probably doesn’t matter.

  • ta00000 [none/use name]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m going to go against the flow here and say BTRFS. It’s stable enough to the point of being a non consideration. You get full backups using a negligible amount of storage. Even using it on Windows is easier than using ext4 with the winbtrfs driver.

  • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    As someone who ran BTRFS for years, I’m personally switching back to EXT4. Yes, the compression and other features are nice, but when things go wrong and you have to do a recovery, it’s not worth the complexity

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve found it much easier and way more reliable. If I pull out the power on ext4 it is likely to cause corruption and sometimes you can’t fix it.

      Btrfs is pretty much impossible to completely corrupt. I’ve had drives fail and I didn’t lose anything

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Lemme say this - While complex, I can vouch for recovering files on BTRFS. I can’t vouch for recovering files on ext4, because I never had to.

  • rotopenguin@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Btrfs. Just format as one big partition (besides that little EFI partition of course) and don’t worry about splitting up your disk into root and home. Put home on its own subvolume so that root can be rolled back separately from it. You can have automatic snapshots, low-overhead compression, deduplication, incremental backups. Any filesystem can fsck its own metadata, but btrfs is one of the few that also cares if your data is also intact.