In terms of speed, which filesystem would be the best? I would imagine ext4 and XFS would be sufficient, but how about btrfs? Is there any filesystem somewhat designed to be better for SSDS?

Thanks guys!

ButterFS with ssd and discard mount options. F2FS might be good too, never tested it

To be honest i think ssd's are so fast it doesn't really matter, just avoid filesystems that don't support discard

I didnt know btrfs was butterfs and thought you were joking at first lol. Yeah I looked at some benchmarks of F2FS and it seems to be performing the fastest http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...x-40-ssd&num=3 only other thing I need to lookup is if its stable. I think I am leaning toward F2FS at the momemnt. Apprently F2FS is designed more for SD cards...so probably to replace ext4 on android devices. Hmm, maybe I will look at btrfs instead.

If you want stability then ext4 is a no brainer. ButterFS is still considered "experimental" by some because it is still in active development.

First off, what's the interface to your SSD? Unless it's PCIe, you'll never notice a difference. Even with PCIe you'll probably never notice a difference. FWIW I get 1.5 GB/s writes and 1.3 GB/s reads on my PCIe x4 SSD in my laptop formatted as ext4.

Standard SATA 6Gb/s?

Then it shouldn't matter. The interface is slow enough to bottleneck any filesystem.

I see, what else is there nowdays that is faster?

Ext4 is fine, you have to turn off some features (like journaling) to reduce writes on the disk; f2fs was written for SSD so it's fine too. Take a look at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Solid_State_Drives

Why use EXT4 if you're going to disable journaling, why not just use EXT3? I agree with things like noatime but, then, I set that on my spinning rust also as atime is of no use to me.

Outside of speed, would F2FS be a better choice than ext4?

I've been looking into it but there isn't a lot of information about it, like whether it has journaling or whether I need to enable anything special, I guess I don't since it is designed for this stuff?

I think you meant ext2; ext3 fs does have journaling too and, more important, is no more developed (in a near future will be dropped away). You don't need to disable journaling, but you must know that it means a lot of writes on the disk. While trim is a must-have, no journal is an option.

Never tried f2fs, I once followed that wiki for an ext4 partition; I think f2fs would be more ready-to-use.

I meant EXT3 and turn off journaling since EXT3 ought to be supported longer...
Sorry I was being cheeky and suggesting that part of the reason for using EXT4 in the first place is that the journaling helps recovery from unclean shutdown. OK, so it has things like extents but, surely, journaling is one of the things improved in EXT3 over EXT3?

PCIe or NVMe

As I said above, my ext4 PCIe SSD in my laptop gets 1.5 GB/s writes (GB, not Gb). SATA-III tops out around 550 MB/s regardless of the drive or the filesystem used.

That is bad advice...it's one of those crappy suggestions that became prominent in the chaos of FUD that surrounded SSDs and write limits when they were very first introduced.

The SSD write limit is a non-issue in all but the most extreme of corner cases, with or without journaling. Under normal circumstances, literally every other piece of hardware in the computer would die before you hit the SSD's write limit. Would you rather replace your drive in 30 years due to the write limit (vs say 32 years without journaling), or have to deal with a block of corrupt files every time you have an unclean shutdown?

1 members found this post helpful.