Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

EXT4, Btrfs, NILFS2 Performance Compared

Posted by timothy on Tuesday June 30, 2009 @04:07AM from the where-will-you-put-your-bits-next-year? dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Phoronix has published Linux filesystem benchmarks comparing XFS, EXT3, EXT4, Btrfs and NILFS2 filesystems. This is the first time that the new EXT4 and Btrfs and NILFS2 filesystems have been directly compared when it comes to their disk performance though the results may surprise. For the most part, EXT4 came out on top."

1 of 102 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Another lame filesystem review by brunes69 · 2009-06-30 04:13 · Score: 0, Troll

NILFS2 and Btrfs are both TRIM file systems optimized for SSD media. Comparing them to other file systems on a SATA drive is borderline stupidity, because you would never use them on a SATA drive. Any more than comparing NILFS2 or Btrfs to eXT3 on a SSD would be.
It's like comparing the performance of motor oil and sewing machine oil to lubricate an engine or a sewing machine. They're not the same thing just because they are both "oil".