[Asustor] ADM 3.3 now available, with BTRFS support

[RMerlin]

Asustor's ADM 3.3 just came out of beta, adding BTRFS and snapshot support.

https://www.asustor.com/service/release_notes

 

[Callinc]

I thought EXT4 was still more preferable than BTRFS? Is there something?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RMerlin]

I thought EXT4 was still more preferable than BTRFS? Is there something?

BTRFS is a good idea if you need the snapshot capabilities, file deduping, or other BTRFS-specific features. For a home setup however the performance overhead is generally not worth it, and ext4 will be fine.

 

[maxbraketorque]

BTRFS is a good idea if you need the snapshot capabilities, file deduping, or other BTRFS-specific features. For a home setup however the performance overhead is generally not worth it, and ext4 will be fine.

The available info on BTRFS read/write performance vs EXT4 definitely indicates that BTRFS should lag, perhaps significantly. For this reason, I was planning to stick with EXT4 on my AS6104T after the 3.3.0 update. However, the update process killed my RAID 10 volume, so I decided to take this as a sign that I should do a BTRFS vs EXT4 performance comparison. I already posted the results on the ASUSTOR forum, but I might as well post them here too, albeit in a slightly better organized format. I was quite surprised to find that in a realistic environment, BTRFS did quite well. The only area where it clearly lags is in small file write performance. I use my NAS primarily for backup of all the devices in my house, so the small file write speeds for BTRFS would slow down my backup speeds somewhat.

Despite the likely somewhat reduced backup performance, I decided to go with BTRFS primarily because of the claim of better handling of bitrot and bad sector formation. Snapshots sound cool, but I'm not sure how much value they have because most good backup methods incorporate snapshots, I am running RAID 10, and I also make a backup of my backup on an attached USB 3 drive.

 

[Callinc]

Thank you for all the info and running your tests. Ext4 has supported snapshots for awhile as that’s what Qnap uses as a file system. I have snapshots turned on and it’s been great. If I recall correctly, once you take a snapshot your volume performance may take a hit. I don’t know if that might have effected your tests results with BTRFS. Unless I’m mistaken, ZFS is king it just needs too much ram for it to be economical for the average home user or small business. The only NAS systems I’ve seen with it are very high end.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[maxbraketorque]

There does seem to be a rather large number of file system options now. Besides ZFS, there is also F2FS.

 

[RMerlin]

How are the IronWolfs? I will probably need to upgrade my pair of Caviar Red 4 TB by the end of the year. I want to avoid the Red 8 TB because they use older technology (they are both noisier and more power-hungry than the 10 TB), however there's a fair price jump in going with the 10 TB. I wanted to avoid the IronWolfs because I've had a lot of bad experiences with Seagate in general over the years with my own customers, and also multiple reports that apparently they are rather noisy, even emitting frequent clicking sounds while idling. They are however less expensive AND faster than the Reds.

 

[maxbraketorque]

My first size increase was from a pair of 4 TB Reds to a pair of 8 TB IronWolfs, and the IronWolf was definitely faster, probably 1.5x faster during real world usage. I couldn't say about noise because my NAS is tucked away where its unlikely to be found by anyone but me. If you are interested, temperatures are fine. If I leave the fan on auto in my AS6104T, the two inner drives sit at about 54C while the outers sit at 51C. If I set the fan to medium speed, the inners drop to 45C and outers to 42C. That's for a 73F temperature room. I've had the first two IronWolfs for perhaps 6 months, and so far, so good.