Question:Given these three filesystems: XFS, BTRFS and EXT4, I'm wishing to  know which does provide the best data resilience to data corruption  in a setup without RAID. And, of course, why?(You can also elaborate on setup with RAID as long as you first responded without)I'm not asking for your opinion about them and I will flag OT answers appropriately. More specifically, I'm asking for references and data, not about I've been running with EXT4/BTRFS/XFS for X years and have yet to see a corruption: this will be flagged as out topic.By data corruption, I mean any data alteration on-disk (non exhaustive possible sources of corruption: disk bit flip, RAM bit flip, cosmic rays, abrupt shut-down, etc.) Resilience here is two-fold:A more resilient filesystem will allow me to get back as much data as it can, especially if the metadata are corruptedbut it shouldn't do so silently (or would be considered less resilient).I know about how and what is checksummed. Though this is just one way to provide corruption detection. Other FS might use other techniques. Since I'm not an expert in the field, I can't tell if this is the only method used.Plus, checksumming doesn't tell me about the efficiency of recovery if, say, 4kB of metadata are corrupted.
Which file system (among XFS, BTRFS and EXT4 only) does provide the best data resilience to disk corruption?
filesystems;ext4;btrfs;corruption;xfs