I would like to see filesystems benchmarked for robustness.

Specifically, robustness to everything around them not performing as required. For example, imagine an evil SSD which had a 1% chance of rolling a sector back to a previous version, a 1% chance of saying a write failed when it didn't, a 1% chance of writing data to the wrong sector number, a 1% chance of flipping some bits in the written data, and a 1% chance of disconnecting and reconnecting a few seconds later.

Real SSD's have bugs that make them do all of these things.

Given this evil SSD, I want to know how long the filesystem can keep going serving the users usecase.

I have basically the opposite problem. I've been looking for a filesystem that maximizes performance (and minimizes actual disk writes) at the cost of reliability. As long as it loses all my data less than once a week, I can live with it.

Have you tried allowing ext4 to ignore all safety? data=writeback, barrier=0, bump up dirty_ratio, tune ^has_journal, maybe disable flushes with https://github.com/stewartsmith/libeatmydata

> maybe disable flushes with https://github.com/stewartsmith/libeatmydata

overlayfs has a volatile mount option that has that effect. So stacking a volatile overlayfs with the upper and lower on the same ext4 could provide that behavior even for applications that can't be intercepted with LD_PRELOAD