BTRFS concerns (was: Re: Plan for tomorrow's FESCo meeting (2011-06-01))

Josef Bacik josef at toxicpanda.com
Thu Jun 2 17:14:13 UTC 2011


On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:15:59PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> I will be unable to attend tomorrow but I have concerns of making btrfs
>> default without a well tested fsck. I'm aware one is due soon but I don't
>> believe 3-4 months is enough time to test it well enough. On 2.6.38.x I
>> still get regular kernel abrt crashes on resume. Is it even marked stable in
>> the upstream kernel yet?
>
> Another concern is whether btrfs is going to work well to store
> virtual machine disk images (ie. to replace LVM for that purpose,
> where LVM is known to work very efficiently).
>
> Last time I looked -- which I admit was a really long time ago -- it
> behaved fairly pathologically with these huge monolithic files that
> are rewritten in-place.
>
> (Edit: just noticed this bug:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689127 )
>

These sort of issues are my priority and I've spent the last 2 months
specifically working on the kvm performance differences between ext4
and btrfs.  Now we're not on par with ext4 yet, but we aren't 2-3
times slower any more, maybe at the most we're 20% slower.  Thanks,

Josef


More information about the devel mailing list