On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 1:21 AM, Andrew Dahl <droidjd at gmail.com> wrote: > A variety of reasons. The biggest one for me is stability. XFS has been > doing huge filesystems (>50gb) for years. ext4 hasn't. Today, I'd probably > trust ext4 to do a 16 TB fs, but I'd still prefer XFS. The problem with XFS comes in not in general operation, but when you need to fsck, XFS requires 1GB/TB of RAM in the event of a fsck. Does this system have sufficient RAM to fsck if you need to? > For larger filesystem, ext4 performance degrades rapidly while XFS continues > to scale well. You need to ask yourself, do i need this disk in one continuous chunk? I tend to use LVM to split the disk up and carve out ext4 formatted chunks for whatever project i am working on. I also use linux-md instead of the hardware raid controller, in case the raid controller craps out. this is afterall 2nd hand hardware. (iirc zfs also recommends using RAID-Z over hardware raid)