We use XFS for sparql.uniprot.org (basically columnar database with semantic graph) there we recently retested it by accident. We use 2*4 TB consumer SSD ,ok ri

We use XFS for sparql.uniprot.org (basically columnar database with semantic graph) there we recently retested it by accident. We use 2*4 TB consumer SSD ,ok rich consumer ;) With XFS we have 10-13% faster linear write of one big file (1.3TB) and about 20% more reads serviced per minute than EXT4. EXT4 was selected by accident instead of XFS for 1 of the 2 otherwise equal machines when upgrading these with the new 4TB SSDs instead of 1TB ones which they had before. In general I feel that the more you go into "enterprise" storage levels, the more XFS pulls ahead from the EXT family. i.e. laptops and small servers are not where the difference lies.