this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
22 points (92.3% liked)

Selfhosted

40313 readers
249 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

I am setting up a Linux server (probably will be NixOS) where my VM disk files will be stored on top of an NTFS partition. (Yes I know NTFS sucks but it has to be this way.)

I am asking which guest filesystem will have the best performance for a very mixed workload. If I had access to the extra features of BTRFS or ZFS I would use them but I have no idea how CoW interacts with NTFS; that is why I am asking here.

Also I would like some NTFS performance tuning pointers.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I don't understand. Why would you store VM disks on NTFS? This isn't a viable solution and you need to rethink your design. Also for guest filesystems I would go with ext4 as it has lower overhead while still being reasonably modern.

[–] pyrosis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Within guests these days I just use XFS, UFS, or NTFS depending on the os. The hypervisor can have zfs or ceph.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Ufs seems weird to use outside of flash

[–] pyrosis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It seems that way but it performs better than zfs on top of zfs. The only os I ran into that with was opnsense when I was playing with a virtualized firewall.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Don't do ZFS on ZFS. It will destroy performance.

I personally go for EXT4 as is solid and light weight. It is also somewhat resistant to power loss

[–] pyrosis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

That's what I said. Cow on top of cow is bad. Pretty sure ext4 isn't on option on opnsense. UFS or zfs. Which is the only reason I mentioned it at all when presented with that choice.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)