File system type for extra internal hard drive

[wpshooter]

I have an extra (second) internal hard drive in my Linux Mint 18.1 machine that I want to use for backup purposes (hold backup copy of my /home partition and for transferring same /home partition content to or from some USB thumb drives).

Should I format the extra hard drive as FAT32 or NTFS or as one of the available Linux formats ?

Thanks.

 

[mikeymikec]

Is any cross-platform compatibility required?

(I'm not responding as an authority on this topic, I just thought it might be relevant and I'm also interested in the topic)

 

[wpshooter]

Unless I lose my mind, I probably won't be using any operating system other than some form of Linux distribution. Thanks.

 

[Dulanic]

If it's linux only just stick /w ext3/4. If you want cross platform use exFAT. To use exFAT you'd just need to install:

sudo apt-get install exfat-fuse exfat-utils

 

[mv2devnull]

If it's linux only just stick /w ext3/4.

Indeed. Use a "native" format (like ext4), unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise.

What is the status of btrfs? (Red Hat made XFS a default, but I won't recommend that.)

 

[Dulanic]

Indeed. Use a "native" format (like ext4), unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise.

What is the status of btrfs? (Red Hat made XFS a default, but I won't recommend that.)

I use and avoid btrfs.... my root is all btrfs without issue. However my storage array is snapraid, so I use ext4 as btrfs is unstable /w RAID. It's a damn fast format though and I do use it for normal storage.

https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Status

 

[wpshooter]

If it's linux only just stick /w ext3/4. If you want cross platform use exFAT. To use exFAT you'd just need to install:

sudo apt-get install exfat-fuse exfat-utils

Is exFAT the same as XFS that I am seeing listed in Gparted ? Thanks.

Hmmmmm, in looking again I see exfat listed on Gparted but it is grayed out/not available, however both extat-fuse and exfat-utils are both installed on my system, what else do I need, or is it possible that the extra hard drive that I have is not compatible with exfat ?

 

[Dulanic]

Is exFAT the same as XFS that I am seeing listed in Gparted ? Thanks.

Hmmmmm, in looking again I see exfat listed on Gparted but it is grayed out/not available, however both extat-fuse and exfat-utils are both installed on my system, what else do I need, or is it possible that the extra hard drive that I have is not compatible with exfat ?

gparted does not support exFAT partitioning. You'd need to use mkfs.exfat command. And no it is not XFS. ExFAT is a MS filesystem, but is pretty widely used for cross platform compatibility like FAT32 was.

Example:
sudo mkfs.exfat -n LABEL /dev/sdxxx of course updating xxx /w your specific drive info.

 

[mikeymikec]

In my experience, UNIX variants can do odd things certainly with FAT32/NTFS. For example, as a result of backing up a user's home directory onto one of my portable HDDs, I have a non-deletable folder structure because "C:" ended up as a folder name I may have even tried to delete it at a later date using Linux, but to no avail. I'd quick-format the drive if it was convenient and if the issue bothered me that much.

 

[wpshooter]

I formatted the extra drive as Ext4. I then could NOT copy anything to it from my Linux Mint /home partition, gave me permissions error. I then went back and reformatted the extra drive as FAT32, no problems, works fine.

 

[Dulanic]

I formatted the extra drive as Ext4. I then could NOT copy anything to it from my Linux Mint /home partition, gave me permissions error. I then went back and reformatted the extra drive as FAT32, no problems, works fine.

You probably needed to chown it or chmod to give yourself permission. FAT32 has no permissions thats why it worked no issues.

 

[Seba]

FAT32 is not a good option for HDDs and SSDs. For instance, you can't have files greater than 4GB on that partition.

I would choose only between ext4 and NTFS.
NTFS is better if you also want to easily access that drive from Windows (not only if you dual-boot; but you can move the drive to a Windows box and read your data there).

 

[you2]

i would use xfs or ext4 for an external drive. FAT32 and NTFS are only useful if you plan to plug the drive into a windows box. However if you will be going that route then format the drive on windows. FAT32 sucks if you have files larger than 4GB so go with NTFS but linux support for NTFS is weaker due to ms.
-
Not sure why folks in this thread are negative towards XFS; been using it for years both at home and in production networks.

 

[Seba]

It is an internal drive.

My opinion is that if you have to ask, then better stick with either ext4 or NTFS, like I said.

 

[manly]

Indeed. Use a "native" format (like ext4), unless you have a very good reason to do otherwise.

What is the status of btrfs? (Red Hat made XFS a default, but I won't recommend that.)

I haven't tried btrfs but from the reports I've read on Ars, it sounds like it's getting close. Maybe a year or two away from being a mainstream, well-tested filesystem.

 

[you2]

btrfs is pretty stable as a file system in a normal fashion (single disk). It runs into trouble with some of the more elaborate features related to raid and fault recovery. At least that is what I've seen on forums. I personally use zfs for raid. One feature brtfs has that zfs lacks is the ability to increase the raid set after the fact. With zfs if you run out of space you have to create a new raid or replace all the drives with larger ones - both rather expensive options. This is not a unique feature to btrfs as other system support this, such as netapp, but it is a nice feature and one that would cause me to switch to btrfs in the future when it is more mature.
-
zfs is pretty good esp at detecting errors in raid configuration and fixing them. It just isn't all that great with expansion. Not sure how brtfs compares to zfs with regards to raid management and detecting checksum errors et all.