As a full time desktop Linux user since 1999 (the actual year of the Linux desktop) I wish all you Windows folks the best of luck on the next clean install 👍
i’m confused… are you talking about ext4, xfs, zfs…? because these are the filesystems linux people talk about and these are also the filesystems that run the worlds databases and data storage systems
I realize my comment sounds like throwing shade onto the great file systems in the linux space.
I just wanted to point out, that when it comes to file systems you probably want the “old and stuffy” one because it has ben tested by time and you won’t lose your data.
for some things, sure… but for other things i’ll take snapshots, dedupe, etc… i’ll put my system disk on a fancy new filesystem and keep my user data on something more mundane for sure! that allows snapshot and restore of major upgrades with basically no effort
To the best of my knowledge, most of the limitations are around allocation.
NTFS doesn’t allow for extent-based allocation, delayed allocation, uninitialized allocation, etc.
It only has one allocation mode, which is the traditional block-at-a-time (actually “cluster”-at-a-time, though NTFS’s clusters are roughly block-sized compared to other filesystems), which is now thought to be slightly less than ideal in terms of allocation performance and fragmentation.
And…speaking of fragmentation, I believe NTFS still can’t do online defragmentation???
I can’t see anything that contradicts this, but it’s possible I’m out of date.
There are other small differences.
NTFS has unnecessary filename restrictions, like prohibiting " and ? and things.
But that’s typically less important.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
tell me again… how old is ext2 now?
age of the initial version might not be the best metric
That was oddly hostile.
Thanks for the well wishes! I hope they won’t get corrupted on your new, fresh and untested-by-time file system. Go on, save this post. I’ll wait…
i’m confused… are you talking about ext4, xfs, zfs…? because these are the filesystems linux people talk about and these are also the filesystems that run the worlds databases and data storage systems
I realize my comment sounds like throwing shade onto the great file systems in the linux space.
I just wanted to point out, that when it comes to file systems you probably want the “old and stuffy” one because it has ben tested by time and you won’t lose your data.
so… fat>ntfs?
that’s not how this works
Yes, but only when NTFS was still young, though. As it matured and became more reliable it also became “fat<ntfs”, to put it in your terms.
choice is king
for some things, sure… but for other things i’ll take snapshots, dedupe, etc… i’ll put my system disk on a fancy new filesystem and keep my user data on something more mundane for sure! that allows snapshot and restore of major upgrades with basically no effort
Why are Linux nerds so insecure? Lol
?
Making an account to say this seems like the insecure thing. Lol
Also plenty of Windows users criticize NTFS. It’s just outdated. Windows needs a new option.
What about ReFS !? I have read it could be the alternative to NTFS in the future.
Honest question: what are the limitations? Most articles online compare it with FAT, which isn’t really an interesting comparison.
To the best of my knowledge, most of the limitations are around allocation. NTFS doesn’t allow for extent-based allocation, delayed allocation, uninitialized allocation, etc. It only has one allocation mode, which is the traditional block-at-a-time (actually “cluster”-at-a-time, though NTFS’s clusters are roughly block-sized compared to other filesystems), which is now thought to be slightly less than ideal in terms of allocation performance and fragmentation.
And…speaking of fragmentation, I believe NTFS still can’t do online defragmentation??? I can’t see anything that contradicts this, but it’s possible I’m out of date.
There are other small differences. NTFS has unnecessary filename restrictions, like prohibiting " and ? and things. But that’s typically less important.
Nobody tell him