Plans for BTRFS in Fedora
nathaniel at natemccallum.com
Wed Feb 23 14:30:48 UTC 2011
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 09:27 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:18 AM, John Reiser <jreiser at bitwagon.com> wrote:
> > On 02/23/2011 05:07 AM, drago01 wrote:
> >> Defaults should be chooses on the metric what provides the best
> >> experience for the users not based on "what we have been doing in the
> >> past" (i.e stagnation).
> > *One* data corruption constitutes EPIC FAIL. Btrfs is too young,
> > and will be for yet a while longer.
> Well if data corruption is the test then we shouldn't be using Ext4
> either, there was one fixed as recently as the beginning of this
> month. File systems are software like anything else, there will be
> bugs. Off the top of my head I can think of 3 data corrupters we've
> had in 4 years of working on BTRFS, and they've all been hard to hit
> and have not to my knowledge been seen by users, only us developers in
> testing. BTRFS is young, but we have to start somewhere. Thanks,
>From a user's perspective, I've been using btrfs for about 1.5 years on
multiple computers and I've been very happy (particularly on my netbook
where the transparent compression increases the disk writes
considerably). I had one small problem where btrfs wouldn't mount, but
by booting off of a newer kernel I had no problems.
Thanks for your hard work on btrfs everyone!
More information about the devel