Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on suppo.fi
linux·Linuxbycm0002

Btrfs Performance From Linux 6.12 To Linux 7.0 Shows Regressions

Last week I provided a look at the EXT4 and XFS performance from Linux 6.12 LTS through Linux 7.0 in its current development form. As mentioned in that article and as requested by many Phoronix readers, benchmarks have since wrapped up looking at how the Btrfs copy-on-write file-system performance has evolved since that late 2024 period and all major Linux kernel releases past that Long Term Support version.

Btrfs Performance From Linux 6.12 To Linux 7.0 Shows Regressionshttps://www.phoronix.com/review/linux-612-linux-70-btrfsOpen linkView original on suppo.fi
91

15 replies

Maybe this is wrong, but my understanding is BTRFS is generally slower than EXT4, and that's okay. It's not going for speed

Where it shines is not in its speed but in its versatility offering compression, rollback, subvol, etc

For example, for applications, you do a lot of writes/reads to Documents or load resources like for games, so use EXT4 for /home or for a dedicated /games partition

For your system, it could be broken via config tweaks or updates, so use BTRFS to have the rollback options

30
mortoreply
piefed.social

I'm still amazed from discovering filesystem-level compression.

16
aussie.zone

cp --reflink is really cool as well, even if it's just something you expect from a CoW filesystem. Being able to near instantly duplicate a file or folder and work on its copy (with only the changes taking up space) is very useful.

7
lemmy.world

It's not that it's slower than ext4 but that btrfs itself has gotten slower.

6
lemmy.world

Didn't the lead contributor get hyper-psychosis or was that a different filesystem?

3
cm0002reply
suppo.fi

ai psychosis or something, but it was Kent Overstreet of Bcachefs

Btrfs is different

46

WHAT

note to self, do not develop OS's or filesystems lmao

16

Ah bummer... I'm currently using XFS on my server because BTRFS's performance is less than stellar, although I'd love to use it to have native compression

2

You reached the end