You are not logged in.

#1 2020-09-12 09:32:44

j1simon
Member
From: Denmark
Registered: 2016-01-28
Posts: 115

Doubt about filesystem for PCIe NVMe disk

Hi,
In a few days I will receive my new desktop PC with 2 hard drives: a 2 TB SSD disk (SEAGATE FIRECUDA 520 GEN 4 PCIe NVMe) and another 16 TB HDD disk (SEAGATE IRONWOLF PRO HDD).
In the NVMe disk I will install the system and home. And the HDD disk will be for storing mainly high definition videos (most of them of big size: between 5 and 50 GB) for streaming with Plex.
In the HDD I have decided to use the XFS file system, I think that because of the type and size of the files it is the one that will fit better.
But I have doubts with NVMe disk. In this Phoronix test, with the same disk, there are 2 clear winners: XFS and F2FS. I'm not sure which one to use. What is your recommendation?
Regards.

(Remark: On the SSD disk there will be a separate boot partition with FAT32)

Last edited by j1simon (2020-09-12 10:04:44)

Offline

#2 2020-09-12 10:30:42

Head_on_a_Stick
Member
From: London
Registered: 2014-02-20
Posts: 5,537
Website

Re: Doubt about filesystem for PCIe NVMe disk

F2FS because XFS isn't as flexible in respect of resizing[0] and Google is driving F2FS development now because it's the default filesystem for their smartphones[1]. Red Hat is attempting to shoehorn copy-on-write and other "advanced" features into XFS[2] but it all looks a bit hacky to me.

Offline

#3 2020-09-12 10:47:46

thorstenhirsch
Member
Registered: 2005-08-03
Posts: 85

Re: Doubt about filesystem for PCIe NVMe disk

My recommendation is to go with the next gen filesystems: btrfs with lzo compression for everything. The compression can compensate for the slower "native" performance of btrfs, maybe even beat the other filesystems in the end. The downside is that your cpu has to compress/decompress, but on a modern 6 core or 8 core CPU you will hardly see anything. And on the plus side btrfs can save you from bit rot. The snapshots are also a cool feature. And you might want to take a look at zfs, which seems to be faster in many benchmarks than btrfs while providing more or less the same features. Maybe zfs is also more stable than btrfs (when it comes to RAID5/6), but I wouldn't use it for / since its not in the kernel.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB