Linux

46700 readers

1500 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

tell me your experience using zfs/btrfs (programming.dev)

submitted 6 months ago by unhinge@programming.dev to c/linux@lemmy.ml

72 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/9319044

Hey,

I am planning to implement authenticated boot inspired from Pid Eins' blog. I'll be using pam mount for /home/user. I need to check integrity of all partitions.

I have been using luks+ext4 till now. I am ~~hesistant~~ hesitant to switch to zfs/btrfs, afraid I might fuck up. A while back I accidently purged '/' trying out timeshift which was my fault.

Should I use zfs/btrfs for /home/user? As for root, I'm considering luks+(zfs/btrfs) to be restorable to blank state.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] hellvolution@lemmygrad.ml -1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Stick with ext3/ext4

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Ext4 is bad for data integrity and has slow performance. ext3 is just dated.

[–] hellvolution@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I'm running ext2/ext3/ext4 since 2002(?)... Never had a problem! But I've lost lots of data using reiser4, xfs & xfs, specially when blackout happens. If you don't have a no-break/not using a notebook, and you have important data for yourself, I'd stick with ext4. I actually didn't notice thaaaat much of performance boost, when using fast HDDs, SSDs & Nvme between any of these formats!

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Like you say, ext4 is absolutely ancient at this point. I still use it for VMs as it has low overhead and no compression but for bare metal ext4 feels old.

XFS can't really be compared to btrfs or ZFS as it is closer to ext4. If your curious Wikipedia as a table of filesystems and the features they provide. As far as XFS's reliability goes I can't really say as I just use ext4, btrfs or ZFS.