Best filesystem choice for media storage?
 

Just did the math. Getting a new main storage drive and need to decide a filesystem. Thinking about XFS but I don't know where the benefits are.

Currently main data is 1800 video files, average size is 500 megabytes.

EXT4 or XFS?

*EDIT* Forgot to mention, media server.

Both are current type filesystems. Good support in kernel and distros.

I'd think that there currently more tools for ext4 than exist on XFS. Companies tend to use XFS as they also have backup plans.

There are other filesystems to look at also if you are brave.

There are a few sites that tend to do shoot outs for various filesystems and kernels. Use them for ideas.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...x-416-fs&num=1

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...x-415-fs&num=1

Examples. Most of the tests shown have no effect on media server use. Maybe read test would be most important to look at.

Knowing your data speed requirement may also help. 20 users on mpeg2 versus 3 on mpeg4 may be a large different also.

Definitely. I'd recommend at least reading about OpenZFS. In particular the checksumming it has is interesting if you are considering long-term storage. You'll need multiple spindles, around 3 to 6, for the full set advantages though.

Don't you just love co-incidences ?. I was reading this just this morning. Sorta like he's been reading my notes - similar thoughts drove me to btrfs years ago.

XFS seems the f/s of choice for people using media servers. ext4 will will of course do the job too.

My opinion is that ext4 is sort of an patchwork extension of ext3 designed to address some of its limitations for 10 years or so. But it is not going to be continued to ext5. It is specifically designed for Linux, and it's what I use on a laptop or desktop PC for the root directory.

ZFS is a great system with many features, but it requires the hardware to go along with it. And, it requires some work to get it set up so it performs as well as XFS right out of the box. XFS is stone-age technology. But it's really really good, well-thought-out and extensively tested stone-age technology.

I have not used ZFS, because it's simply too much trouble for what I tend to do. I use XFS for a partial Debian mirror consisting of roughly 500.000 files in 600GB. I haven't had a problem with any file system in over four years, I think partially because I use double inversion UPS backup power which supplies clean power and prevents improper shutdowns when utility power is periodically lost.

I don't personally think ext4 is much of a special-use file system. So, given the choice of ext4 or XFS for long term storage on a large volume, I would use XFS.

I'll read the links, thank you. The only reason I haven't thought of zfs is I didn't want to be tied into a specific thing. For now I've been using snapraid and mergerfs with good results. I like the ability to grow the array as needed instead of having to build it to specs on the initial deployment. I'll see if I can get the cash together to go zfs though. If not I will probably end up with xfs. Appreciate the responses.

ZFS does have its shortcomings but it can be tuned quite a bit and so things not needed like de-duplication can be avoided to save resources. Either way, let us know what you chose and how it worked out. It would be very interesting to know how either one work out for your use-case.

My end result. This drive is more of a stopgap solution to hold me over for a bit as I get cash together to build something more proper for my needs. Ext4, backed up via snapraid. I will be building something around zfs in the near future assuming all goes according to plan.

Again thank you for replies.