# BTRFS vs EXT4 vs ZFS Filesystem for storj **URL:** \ **Category:** Node Operators\ **Tags:** btrfs, zfs, hardware\ **Created:** [April 11, 2022, 4:38pm UTC](https://forum.storj.io/t/btrfs-vs-ext4-vs-zfs-filesystem-for-storj/18069 "2022-04-11T16:38:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 2
**Author:** ![Alexey](https://storj.bcdn.literatehosting.com/user_avatar/forum.storj.io/alexey/32/41_2.png) [@Alexey](https://forum.storj.io/u/Alexey)\ **Post date:** [April 11, 2022, 8:10pm UTC](https://forum.storj.io/t/btrfs-vs-ext4-vs-zfs-filesystem-for-storj/18069/2 "2022-04-11T20:10:47Z")
Your assumptions are correct, the best FS for Storj on Linux is ext4. BTRFS is not good for Storj, it’s also not production ready. The only normally working implementation is on Synology. ZFS is useful only when you want to have all its features and ready to put up with shortcomings, including the slow operation of this FS (in comparison with ext4). It’s useless without more than one disk (for mirror) or at least three for raidz. See > [@Doh.. Looks like hardware failure coming up!](https://forum.storj.io/t/doh-looks-like-hardware-failure-coming-up/16181/9): > > It makes sense only in RAID configurations, otherwise it’s slower than ext4 in 6 times (the simple single disk zfs and the same disk ext4). Unfortunately in my tests with default options for raidz and LVM parity volumes I received not good results. On the same hardware and disks the raidz (3 disks) is slower than LVM parity (the same 3 disks and 3 columns) in 5 (!) times for the rsync and a continuous 1G and 2G files confused I tested it 3 times cleaning env before the next test, the differ… --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.storj.io/t/btrfs-vs-ext4-vs-zfs-filesystem-for-storj/18069)._