Linux Filesystem of the Year
 

A new category this year.

--jeremy

Use Ext4 mostly but also Ext3 for storage.

ext4 mainly on hard drive (and on live persistence usb devices), though I do have some partitions using Btrfs

i very recently read --somewhere-- that ext3 is EOL, but ext4 will continue to support it.
not entirely sure how that will work out, does it mean i can still format to ext3 via ext4?
in any case, when i started using linux 4years ago, ext4 was a bit of a gamble, but nowadays it's just standard, imho.

Voted ext4 as I've had issues with both btrfs and reiserfs on external drives in the past but never ext4. It seems to work fine on SSDs, spinning rust and USB sticks and. I've yet to have an issue (you wait, I'll get home to no working storage).
Far as I can tell the anouncement was that the code to deal with ext3 was removed from the kernel because the code to deal with ext4 is backwards compatible and has been used for some versions anyhow. It seems one will still be able to format ext2 and ext3 for as long as the developers see fit. Since it is backwards compatibility my (very uneducated guess) is that there would have to be a major change in functionality of ext4 before they need to drop backwards compatibility.

I've moved my Slackware box from ext4 to XFS. Works like no big deal.

Regards.

using mainly btrfs
 

using mainly btrfs. I found out that you can install different Linux systems in separate subvolumes on one btrfs partition and doint that since almost a year now. Debian and wattOS get their packages DB file corrupted on kernel higher than 4.0, but some other Debian based systems don't have this issue.

BTRFS for many reasons....just remember to scrub ;)

Ext4

Btrfs is well.... NOT.

I wish more advanced Linux filesystems had full support in Windows, for all us dual-booters. Ext2 works great via Ext2FSD, but Ext3 support has problems, and occasionally loses/corrupts data. It's now possible to read from and write to ext4, but it's really glitchy, and I (rightfully, I dare say) don't trust it. So far as I know, there's no (relatively) safe way to read or write BTRFS in Windows. I'm really looking forward to BTRFS reaching maturity...except that I dread not being able to access it from my secondary OS. NTFS works in both OSes, but is a LOT slower to write to in Linux--do a file transfer test, if you don't believe me--so I use Ext2 on my data drives. (Also try comparing reads via rw-mounted NTFS and ro-mounted NTFS.)

Still waiting for the perfect filesystem... :-)

Ext4. When I boot to windows 10 I have a minimal vm running samba. Been doing that since windows xp..

zfs and all the scrub, resilvering and stuff.... works for me.

SteveG_0001: clever! I might have to do that. Which VM do you use, and how does it affect performance (games, etc.)?

dDaneM: VirtualBox 5. With fedora. It's faster than rebooting to Linux, copy to USB and reboot to windows. I don't know how it effects games.

You can't really run anything which requires 3D acceleration in a virtual machine. The performance hit for older titles is probably negligible as long as your CPU isn't old and your're not struggling to give the VM memory. Disk read and write in the VM is slower also but having a little spare RAM on the host seems to help this a bit too.
Thanks, you have reminded me to check whether I can run any of the Fallout games in a VM (though I'll have to see whether I can get another trial license of Windows W0 first).