https://www.osnews.com/story/138501...rime-time-due-to-lack-of-wider-compatibility/ ReFS is like 5 years old right?
Last edited:
Bootable Windows on ReFS still not ready for prime time due to lack of wider compatibility
- Thread starter Edward78
- Start date
Soldato
Pretty sure it's lot older than 5 years
I have used Windows storage spaces much longer
Than 5 years
Though obviously not bootable
I have used Windows storage spaces much longer
Than 5 years
Though obviously not bootable
Don
Full article here: https://www.neowin.net/news/bootabl...rime-time-due-to-lack-of-wider-compatibility/
It's 11 years old - it was available with Windows Server 2012
People have managed to boot from it but clearly it's got some issues and is disabled for good reason
Whilst the intentions are good, I just don't think Microsoft has either the calibre of engineers or the structure in place to build software in the same way as they did when NTFS and the like were designed.
With NTFS they "got it right" from day 1, and it's worked (almost) flawlessly for over 30 years, despite supporting storage devices and capacities that could only have been dreamed of back in 1993.
NTFS had 5 major versions over 8 years (with the first release in 1993 and the last in 2001) and for the most part they were forwards and backwards compatible without any real issues.
In contrast ReFS has had at least 15 versions since it's creation in 2012, and compatibility is not assured between versions
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
It's 11 years old - it was available with Windows Server 2012
People have managed to boot from it but clearly it's got some issues and is disabled for good reason
Whilst the intentions are good, I just don't think Microsoft has either the calibre of engineers or the structure in place to build software in the same way as they did when NTFS and the like were designed.
With NTFS they "got it right" from day 1, and it's worked (almost) flawlessly for over 30 years, despite supporting storage devices and capacities that could only have been dreamed of back in 1993.
NTFS had 5 major versions over 8 years (with the first release in 1993 and the last in 2001) and for the most part they were forwards and backwards compatible without any real issues.
In contrast ReFS has had at least 15 versions since it's creation in 2012, and compatibility is not assured between versions
NTFS - Wikipedia
ReFS - Wikipedia
Soldato
Yeah 11 years sounds more like it
It's certainly proven resilient for my usage
Despite my best attempts over the years
I have only ever managed
To make a storage space totally corrupted once
It's certainly proven resilient for my usage
Despite my best attempts over the years
I have only ever managed
To make a storage space totally corrupted once
Don
New unfortunately rarely equals reliable.
What are you personally missing from NTFS that you feel a new filesystem would solve?
Like Mcnumpty2323 said, very hard to corrupt, that sounds great for a OS FS.
Don
And how often do you experience data corruption with NTFS?
I don't. I don't drive a car, but I am for safer cars.
Soldato
| Feature | ReFS | NTFS |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum file name length | 255 Unicode characters | 255 Unicode characters |
| Maximum path name length | 32K Unicode characters | 32K Unicode characters |
| Maximum file size | 35 PB (petabytes) | 256 TB |
| Maximum volume size | 35 PB | 256 TB |
| BitLocker encryption | Yes | Yes |
| Data Deduplication | Yes1 | Yes |
| Cluster Shared Volume (CSV) support | Yes2 3 | Yes |
| Junctions/Soft links | Yes | Yes |
| Hard links | Yes4 | Yes |
| Failover cluster support | Yes | Yes |
| Access-control lists | Yes | Yes |
| USN journal | Yes | Yes |
| Changes notifications | Yes | Yes |
| Junction points | Yes | Yes |
| Mount points | Yes | Yes |
| Reparse points | Yes | Yes |
| Volume snapshots | Yes | Yes |
| File IDs | Yes | Yes |
| Oplocks | Yes | Yes |
| Sparse files | Yes | Yes |
| Named streams | Yes | Yes |
| Thin Provisioning | Yes5 | Yes |
| Trim/Unmap | Yes5 | Yes |
| Page file support | Yes6 | Yes |
| Functionality | ReFS | NTFS |
|---|---|---|
| Block clone | Yes | No |
| Sparse VDL | Yes | No |
| Mirror-accelerated parity | Yes (on Storage Spaces Direct) | No |
| File-level snapshots | Yes1 | No |
| File system compression | No | Yes |
| File system encryption | No | Yes |
| Transactions | No | Yes |
| Object IDs | No | Yes |
| Offloaded Data Transfer (ODX) | No | Yes |
| Short names | No | Yes |
| Extended attributes | No | Yes |
| Disk quotas | No | Yes |
| Bootable | No | Yes |
| Supported on removable media | No | Yes |
Resilient File System (ReFS) overview
Learn more about: Resilient File System (ReFS) overview
learn.microsoft.com
ReFS already has all features NTFS had but it lacked all 10 functions like file system compression, file system encryption, transactions, object IDs, offloaded data transfer (ODX), short names, extended attributes, disk quotas, bootable and supported on removable media.
Hopefully soon in a few years when ReFS add these 10 missing functions then ReFS will be finally ready to replace NTFS.
Soldato
I did experienced data corruption with NTFS on Windows XP, Vista and 7 with MBR partition about 5 or 6 times backup data to large hard disks then format and reinstall Windows.
But I did not experienced data corruption with NTFS on Windows 8, 8.1, 10 and 11 with GPT partition for 14 years as chkdsk succeed repaired data corruption and recovered fully everytime while MBR had failed everytime.
I rhink it is bootable my dad found a article, I will try to find it. It seemed nuts that after all this time it still wasn't bootable.
www.youtube.com
Windows 11 soon to install on reFS drives out of the box test done on Canary builds
This will be interesting to see when it arrives on consumer version of Windows 11
www.youtube.com
Last edited: