I use xfs by default, including for backups, but I'm back to using f2fs for my main drive (this one). I was an early adopter of ext4 since it was the shiny new thing when I migrated over to using Linux as my main OS. The data corruption I had to deal with from that was less fun.
Conversation
I mostly need performance and don't have a use case for fancy features. I'm either going to use a single f2fs partition covering the entire 2TB NVMe SSD or a single XFS partition. No need to ever resize it, combine it with other drives, apply compression, etc. Simple is fine.
1
1
But you've run into data corruption issues in the past; zfs will at least detect those - even if you're not using mirror/raidz - instead of returning bad data to your apps. xfs doesn't do that
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
By the way, I have 64G of non-ECC RAM... and that's going to become 128G or more when I upgrade this year from this 2016 workstation build. I would like to buy ECC RAM but I'm not buying a Xeon rather than an X series CPU so Intel doesn't think I should be allowed to use it.
2
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
only Pentium/i3 and Xeon support ECC. i5/i7/i9 do not
1
3
Yeah, they go out of the way to disable this in the hardware to differentiate Xeons. I love the X series CPUs for workstation usage. They're a specially binned Xeon die with a substantially higher base clock rate and unlocked multipliers (per-core multipliers, turbo ratios), etc.
1
2
However, they go out of the way to disable a bunch of the server features. Cost / value of X series CPUs is amazing compared to Xeons, especially if you pay $100 for a CPU cooler like noctua.at/en/nh-d15 and do a 30-40% overclock. I have an i7-6950X from 2016 @ 4.4GHz ATM.
1
3
X series CPUs tend to have fewer virtualization features available than even a regular i7, etc. because they disable as much as they can get away with to reduce the ability to use an X series CPU instead of a Xeon. It's ridiculous. I would pay more for an X series with ECC...
Skylake X:
ark.intel.com/content/www/us
2k USD, 18 core / 36 thread, 3GHz base, 4.4GHz turbo, 4.5GHz specific core turbo and unlocked multipliers to overclock
Skylake Xeon:
ark.intel.com/content/www/us
3.8k USD, 18 core / 36 thread, 3.1GHz base, 4GHz turbo, same L1/L2/L3 cache
1
1
This is the highest end X series CPU. It's not a good deal. The price is massively inflated for enthusiasts wanting to buy the best available consumer CPU. Still, you compare that to the matching Xeon and you can see that Xeons are an absolute complete ripoff of insane levels.
1
2
Show replies