I'm strongly against this proposal. BTRFS is the most unstable
system I ever seen. It can break up even under an ideal conditions and
lead to a complete data loss. There are lots of complaints and bug
reports in Linux kernel bugzilla and Reddit.
Without providing evidence, this is
just unsubstantiated FUD. As with any piece of software, also btrfs may have bugs, but the
only know issue which may have implications with regard to data loss are the raid5/6 write
holes, which are documented on btrfs' gotchas  and status  pages. However, there
are many other good reasons why raid5/6 configurations should be avoided - with any
filesystem. For more detailed explanations see  and . Even though these articles are
written for ZFS, the drawbacks around raid5/6 apply equally well to other filesystems.
Also, to note, many of the early "issues" and "bug" reports around
btrfs were due to user-space utilities such as snapper. I ran into some of these issues
myself (specifically a issue with meta-data on openSUSE at around 2012), which made me
very sceptical of btrfs for several years. However, I recently did my research on modern
filesystems when setting up a home NAS and came to the conclusion that ZFS and btrfs are
the best filesystems currently available. I subsequently opted for ZFS due to the
excellent community support and user-space utilities, and do not only use ZFS for the NAS,
but also on my Fedora laptop.
I personally like the articles on modern filesystems by Jim Salter, where especially the
one from 2014 discusses the advantages of ZFS and btrfs . (That article was a excellent
entry point to the topic for, and is especially well suited for people otherwise not
really familiar with this topic.)