Introducing
The Slant team built an AI & it’s awesome
Find the best product instantly
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now
4.7 star rating
0
Sysadmin
What are the best file systems?
19
Options
Considered
125
User
Recs.
Jan 14, 2024
Last
Updated
Related Questions
Activity
Have feedback or ideas?
Join our community
on Discord
Ad
19
Options
Considered
Best file systems
Price
License
Last Updated
73
Btrfs
FREE
GPL-2.0-only
Jan 14, 2024
--
ZFS
-
-
Jan 4, 2024
--
bcachefs
-
-
Oct 31, 2023
--
EXT4
-
-
Nov 8, 2023
--
TFS
-
-
Sep 25, 2020
See Full List
73
Btrfs
My Rec
ommendation
for
Btrfs
My Recommendation for
Btrfs
All
16
Experiences
2
Pros
12
Cons
1
Specs
Top
Pro
•••
Open-source
Btrfs is open-source, so it is free (as in freedom), you can also tweak/edit it as how you like it, share it with anyone, and contribute to the project! Source code can be found the the Linux GitHub repository.
See More
Top
Con
•••
Poor cross-platform support
Third party drivers such as WinBtrfs exist, but there is no official support in Windows or MacOS.
See More
Haldrin's Experience
The Best filesystem on Linux.
See More
Specs
License:
GPL-2.0-only
Top
Pro
•••
Good compression
While LZO is by far not the most effective compression algorithm, running it on a per-volume basis allows larger volumes to be shrinked quite well, which in some cases may also increase I/O throughput.
See More
mkukiro's Experience
Btrfs is the fastest filesystem I ever tried, I had a great experience with Btrfs, never had an error.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Linux integration
Btrfs support is built into the Linux kernel.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
RAID / Drive pooling / Multiple device support
Storage devices of different sizes can be combined transparently into a single storage pool, drives can be swapped out with larger drives, or more drives added to the pool to increase capacity, etc. Support for software-based RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 10. RAID is supported even with drives of different sizes, on a per-file basis.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Have snapper to create pre/post BTRFS and LVM snapshots.
A tool for managing BTRFS and LVM snapshots. It can create, diff and restore snapshots and provides timelined auto-snapping.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Easy to manage
Just one userspace tool, with which one can manage the entire filesystem, volumes, and subvolumes, create snapshots, change quotas, and more.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Compression
Individual blocks of files can be transparently compressed using three different algorithms, useful when particular files are large, easily compressed, and rarely changed.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Space-efficient packing of small files
Files less than ~2KiB can be stored in the metadata section (“inline” in the b-tree nodes), so as not to waste most of a block.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Self-healing / bit rot protection
Checksums for data and metadata, automatic detection of silent data corruptions. Can set files to be stored redundantly as multiple copies on the same drive, or spread across multiple drives to protect against corruption. Background scrub process for finding and repairing errors of files with redundant copies.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Deduplication / reflinks
Files with the same content as an existing file can take up zero space. Unlike hardlinks, reflinks are still independent files, and the copy is editable without affecting the original, with only the changed blocks taking up additional disk space.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Full GParted support
Btrfs has full GParted support.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Very fast
Btrfs is probably the fastest file system out there.
See More
Hide
See All
FREE
Recommend
34
6
--
ZFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
ZFS
My Recommendation for
ZFS
All
2
Experiences
1
Cons
1
Top
Con
•••
Licensing issues making Linux integration not possible
See More
PoisedAequitas's Experience
ZFS makes drive efficient and reduces the chances to data loss except catastrophe.
See More
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
14
3
--
bcachefs
My Rec
ommendation
for
bcachefs
My Recommendation for
bcachefs
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
8
1
--
EXT4
My Rec
ommendation
for
EXT4
My Recommendation for
EXT4
All
5
Experiences
2
Pros
3
Top
Pro
•••
Very mature
Ext4 is now officially old enough to purchase and consume alcohol in the United States, having first been released in December 2000 as part of Linux kernel 2.6.28. Its status as the "primus inter pares" (first among equals) of in-tree Linux file system drivers ensures it continues to see a steady stream of upgrades and enhancements as well as bug fixes with no plans to be replaced by a new major release of ext or deprecated in favor of another filesystem entirely. It almost certainly will be with us for another decade or more as the default Linux filesystem.
See More
NobleEnmerkar's Experience
Stable, ready for eveyday use
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Backwards compatible
The ext4 driver will mount older ext3 volumes seamlessly and even permits for upgrading them in-place, if certain conditions are met.
See More
Peter J. Mello's Experience
Still the standard by which I judge all filesystems, ext4 has never let me down.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
48-bit block addressing
The upgrade to 48-bit addresses took the limitations of the filesystem from a tight orbit out into deep space, with the maximum volume size now a comfortable 1 EiB (that's exbibytes with an 'e', over a million tebibytes) and the maximum single file to 16 TiB when using the default 4KiB block size.
See More
Hide
See All
Recommend
6
3
--
TFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
TFS
My Recommendation for
TFS
All
16
Pros
15
Cons
1
Top
Pro
•••
Concurrent
TFS contains very few locks and aims to be as suitable for multithreaded systems as possible. It makes use of multiple truly concurrent structures to manage the data, and scales linearly by the number of cores. This is perhaps the most important feature of TFS.
See More
Top
Con
•••
Not ready for use
While many components are complete, TFS itself is not ready for use.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Usable in other systems
It was never planned to be Redox-only.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Revision history
TFS stores a revision history of every file without imposing extra overhead. This means that you can revert any file into an earlier version, backing up the system automatically and without imposed overhead from copying.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Data integrity
TFS, like ZFS, stores full checksums of the file (not just metadata), and on top of that, it is done in the parent block. That means that almost all data corruption will be detected upon read.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Copy-on-write semantics
Similarly to Btrfs and ZFS, TFS uses CoW semantics, meaning that no cluster is ever overwritten directly, but instead it is copied and written to a new cluster.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
O(1) recursive copies
Like some other file systems, TFS can do recursive copies in constant time, but there is an unique addition: TFS doesn't copy even after it is mutated. How? It maintains segments of the file individually, such that only the updated segment needs copying.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Guaranteed atomicity
The system will never enter an inconsistent state (unless there is hardware failure), meaning that unexpected power-off won't ever damage the system.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Improved caching
TFS puts a lot of effort into caching the disk to speed up disk accesses. It uses machine learning to learn patterns and predict future uses to reduce the number of cache misses. TFS also compresses the in-memory cache, reducing the amount of memory needed.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Better file monitoring
CoW is very suitable for high-performance, scalable file monitoring, but unfortunately only few file systems incorporate that. TFS is one of those.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
All memory safe
TFS uses only components written in Rust. As such, memory unsafety is only possible in code marked unsafe, which is checked extra carefully.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Full coverage testing
TFS aims to be full coverage with respect to testing. This gives relatively strong guarantees on correctness by instantly revealing large classes of bugs.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Improved garbage collection
TFS uses Bloom filters for space-efficient and fast garbage collection. TFS allows the FS garbage collector to run in the background without blocking the rest of the file system.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
SSD friendly
TFS tries to avoid the write limitation in SSD by repositioning dead sectors.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Full-disk compression
TFS is the first file system to incorporate complete full-disk compression through a scheme we call RACC (random-access cluster compression). This means that every cluster is compressed only affecting performance slightly. It is estimated that you get 60-120% more usable space.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Asynchronous
TFS is asynchronous: operations can happen independently; writes and reads from the disk need not block.
See More
Hide
See All
Get it
here
Recommend
2
--
JFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
JFS
My Recommendation for
JFS
Hide
Recommend
2
--
F2FS
My Rec
ommendation
for
F2FS
My Recommendation for
F2FS
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
3
1
--
HAMMER
My Rec
ommendation
for
HAMMER
My Recommendation for
HAMMER
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
2
1
--
NTFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
NTFS
My Recommendation for
NTFS
All
1
Cons
1
Top
Con
•••
Proprietary
See More
Hide
Recommend
4
5
--
BeeGFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
BeeGFS
My Recommendation for
BeeGFS
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
2
1
--
XFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
XFS
My Recommendation for
XFS
All
4
Experiences
1
Pros
3
Top
Pro
•••
Modern XFS (year 2021) is robust against hard resets and power outages
For old versions of XFS this was not true, but since there was put much effort in XFS in the last years, it got so much better.
See More
CooperativeHyperion's Experience
With modern XFS (talking about the year 2021) I had very good experiences on an external thumb drive I am booting Linux from. My filesystem didn't get corrupted for a couple of years, even after hard resets or power outages. With f2fs, NILFS2 and NTFS3 (new open source driver from Paragon since Linux 5.15) I experienced damaged filsystems.
See More
Top
Pro
•••
XFS supports deduplication
See More
Top
Pro
•••
XFS supports copy-on-write
See More
Hide
See All
Recommend
5
2
--
NOVA
My Rec
ommendation
for
NOVA
My Recommendation for
NOVA
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
1
1
--
NILFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
NILFS
My Recommendation for
NILFS
All
1
Pros
1
Top
Pro
•••
CRC32 Checksums for metadata and data
See More
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
1
1
--
ReFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
ReFS
My Recommendation for
ReFS
Hide
Get it
here
Recommend
1
1
--
EXT2
My Rec
ommendation
for
EXT2
My Recommendation for
EXT2
All
1
Cons
1
Top
Con
•••
No journaling
See More
Hide
Recommend
2
--
ReiserFS
My Rec
ommendation
for
ReiserFS
My Recommendation for
ReiserFS
All
2
Cons
2
Top
Con
•••
Unsupported
See More
Top
Con
•••
Development is stagnated by years
See More
Hide
Recommend
3
--
EXT3
My Rec
ommendation
for
EXT3
My Recommendation for
EXT3
Hide
Recommend
3
--
exFAT
My Rec
ommendation
for
exFAT
My Recommendation for
exFAT
All
2
Cons
2
Top
Con
•••
no journaling
See More
Top
Con
•••
no symlinks
See More
Hide
Recommend
3
--
FAT32
My Rec
ommendation
for
FAT32
My Recommendation for
FAT32
All
5
Pros
1
Cons
4
Top
Con
•••
Maximum file size of 4 GiB
See More
Top
Pro
•••
Widely supported.
See More
Top
Con
•••
No symlinks
See More
Top
Con
•••
Ancient alocationg table, prone to many types of problems.
See More
Top
Con
•••
No journaling
See More
Hide
See All
Recommend
3
Don't see your favorite option? Add it.
Built By the Slant team
Find the best product instantly.
4.7 star rating
Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to Safari
Try it now - it's free
One sec!
Are you sure that you want to abandon your hard work?
Delete Work
Continue working
{"amp_action":"signup"}
undefined
url next
price drop