I’m setting up a new hard drive and formatted it as exFAT. I liked the cross platform support and not having to deal with permissions when mounting the device. BUT it doesn’t support hardlinks, which I want to use for the *arr apps. Is NTFS the best pick, and I’ll just have to live with read only on mac?
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| NFS | Network File System, a Unix-based file-sharing protocol known for performance and efficiency |
| RAID | Redundant Array of Independent Disks for mass storage |
| ZFS | Solaris/Linux filesystem focusing on data integrity |
3 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 6 acronyms.
[Thread #913 for this sub, first seen 8th Aug 2024, 22:15] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
Ohhh I didn’t realize it didn’t matter if it was accessed over the network with samba. This’ll just be on a Debian server
Yeah, so in that case I’d just use ext4 or, if you want checksums, btrfs (though this doesn’t matter too much as btrfs currently doesn’t support raid in any real sense, so it can’t actually correct the data, just tell you it’s bad).
ZFS can do the checksums with RAID and error correction, but getting that on Linux (without using a specialty distro like TrueNAS Scale) is still a pain.
It’s not hard on Debian
I’m a huge fan of XFS for network mounts. I think everyone else here is right that the best filesystem will depend on the OS, and picking one to make it compatible with everything has serious tradeoffs.
I didn’t have a great reason other than mind-blowing performance on my LAN, and with large files (which I have a lot of) performance is better too. Probably I’m not smart enough to answer this well, but I did just see this today: https://www.phoronix.com/review/linux-611-filesystems/2
“*arr apps”?
Why are you running servers with a data store on a partition that you mount on multiple operating systems?
