If you're interested in a more featureful filesystem that isn't btrfs and has a very solid track record, I would recommend looking at XFS. It's a very old filesystem but has a lot of quite modern features (and it performs better than ext4 for several workloads).
Funnily enough, XFS is the only file system on Linux where I've lost data. Back in the day, the wisdom was to stay away from it if you were in an iffy power situation because it would serve zeroes if there was a write to a file near a power loss (I.e. you wouldn't get old file or new file but something else)
Having had that happen to me I always used some extN and didn't lose any existing files.
Of course that's a decade or more ago and I may be misremembering but a cursory Google looks like other people encountered something like it too.
Afaik the problem is that XFS trusts the hardware to do the right thing during a power loss aka stop inflight requests before the brownout turns you disks and their controllers into heavily biased random number generators. Lots of x86(-64) hardware lacks a proper power loss interrupt triggered early enough to stop the all I/O in time. The ext3 journaling hides that problem to some extend by journaling more than just the minimal metadata required.
For maybe 3-6 months a decade ago I was running XFS on my laptop. My laptop had some sort of flakiness, ISTR it was graphics related, and it would require frequent reboots for a while. I remember one particular instance where after a power cycle a file I was working on an hour prior to it was trashed. That was a real "Oh FFS!" moment and I stopped using XFS.
But, I will say I've had a lot of success using XFS to serve images, particularly tiles. Particularly map tiles that are generated once and then basically static. There it has a lot less overhead when formatted with size=2048, so lots of small files are handled better. Of course, reiserfs was even better, but part of that was with a job I worked on where they just blindly rendered map tiles for the whole earth, and so there were a lot of 50 byte solid blue tiles. Reiser did really well with that, though some deduplication or linking would have been a huge benefit.
> I would recommend looking at XFS. It's a very old filesystem but has a lot of quite modern features (and it performs better than ext4 for several workloads).
I would second this. XFS is great. A few years ago I moved from JFS to XFS for bulk data storage because JFS is pretty abandoned these days. No issues at all with XFS, and never lost any data.
Just make sure it's right for you before you use it (e.g. you cannot shrink XFS volumes as you can ext4)
XFS has the same problem as btrfs: extreme sensitivity to metadata corruption. I'm not sure XFS has the RAID1-for-metadata (DUP) feature like btrfs has recently added.
