btrfs as default filesystem for F22?
h.reindl at thelounge.net
Tue Oct 7 18:15:34 UTC 2014
Am 07.10.2014 um 20:05 schrieb Matthias Clasen:
> On Tue, 2014-10-07 at 13:24 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Gerald B. Cox <gbcox at bzb.us> wrote:
>>> Thanks James... I am aware of all the warnings. They might as well put up a
>>> skull & crossbones. I have all my data backed up twice. But this is my
>>> point... you don't say toxic and then simultaneously talk about proposing it
>>> as the default file system on Fedora.
>> Right... no single person is saying both things. We don't have
>> split-personality disorder here. Someone started discussing it as
>> default, and a bunch of other people chimed in that it wasn't ready.
>> Until those concerns are dealt with, it's not really even a candidate
>> for default consideration.
> I think the point is somewhat valid though. To just keep repeating the
> mantra 'its not ready' is not going to make it any more ready. If suse
> can identify a stable subset of btrfs features and use it as their
> default file system with those restrictions, why can't we do the same ?
> The approach makes sense to me, at least...
> Are the suse and fedora kernels that different that there is no synergy
> to be had here?
it's not a difference of the kernel
it's the question if it *really* achieves anything for users to siwitch
a default with restrictions because *known* rough edges - nobody
supports the users which end in troubles and can throw away all the ext4
Google hits in case of trouble
for radical changes you should not ask "is it possible" - better ask
"has it really benefits beating the drawbacks and so is worth now"
if it ain't broken don't fix it!
is ext4 broken? no!
so why would you prefer to replace it *as default*?
corrupted data is the worst which can happen on a computer and god
beware you realize breakage too late and your backups contain damaged
data - do you really want that possible burden as default for people
know clue how to deal with it? people who know can use BTRFS anyways!
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the devel