Re:Ask HN: Which Linux filesystem “produce” less wear and te...
by Piskvorrr on Friday April 03, 2020 @09:39AM
(#22769009)
If they're always-on, reboots are rare...I keep a similar workstation on ext4 over RAID-1 (once bitten by bad disks, twice shy; I seem to have been hit by an abnormal number of submarine drives back in the day).
Talking about desktop Linux, I (and my family) and workplace colleagues all run Kubuntu systems on SSD's continuously since 2012 - that's 8 years of continuous disk wear and counting. We're talking about 3 laptops and 5 desktops, several of them mdadm RAID0 (on 2-3 disks), all Ext4, and NO swap partitions (warning, this may lead to occasional crashes due to OOM situations, though that's going to improve soon hopefully). Three of these systems are heavy usage workstations, 5 of them have one or more VMs running, all of these systems are backed up to external USB2/3 disks via Timeshift [0] since 2012 (VM disk images are backed up separately). A few critical directories are shared via cloud, which thus also acts as a backup tool. All disks are periodically health checked via smartmontools. This in my experience maximizes performance (thanks to Ext4 and RAID0), while keeping stuff safe (thanks to backups). IMHO desktop systems don't need the kind of online redundancy provided by other RAID levels, and restoring a full system (including grub, on an mdadm system) from a Timeshift snapshot, which I did multiple times already, has always been a breeze.
Among the ~10 SSD corruption events I witnessed in this decade, I could track ~half down to a failing PSU or a bad SATA cable, though I had a couple disks abruptly die too (one NVME M.2 drive probably had thermal issues). Still, IMHO none was caused by wear.
relevant smartctl output for one of my desktop SSDs:
So, ~24 Tb written so far...[0] https://teejeetech.in/