It's worth considering a filesystem that supports error detection/correction such as ZFS... Though to really make use of that you need to have a machine with ECC RAM.  Not sure what all you have for a layout, but bitflips in backup data can make for a bad time.

Generally speaking I doubt you'll see a massive difference in performance from one FS to the other when dealing with Bacula.  Where you really notice a difference is things like "deleting a directory with 10,000 files in it" which is one area where EXT* performs very poorly.  That however isn't a use case that you'd encounter with Bacula (or really any other backup system apart from maybe some sort of rsync-based setup).  Raw sequential read/write performance won't be massively different one FS to another; at most you're probably talking about a few percentage points unless you've got something like a badly aligned RAID array underneath it all.  Either way it's usually network bandwidth that's the bottleneck rather than disk, unless you're trying to do a lot of simultaneous I/O.

Bryn

On 2015-11-03 12:23 PM, Thing wrote: