btrfs as default filesystem for F22?

[Eric Sandeen]

On 10/8/14 8:39 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 08.10.2014 14:50, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info> wrote:
>>> Josh Boyer wrote on 07.10.2014 21:15:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 2:24 PM, Josef Bacik <josef at toxicpanda.com> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>> http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel-source/tree/patches.suse/btrfs-8888-add-allow_unsupported-module-parameter.patch?h=SLE11-SP3
>>> http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel-source/tree/patches.suse/btrfs-8888-add-allow_unsupported-module-parameter.patch?h=SLE12
>> [...] 
>> I'm not thrilled with adding that patch to Fedora at all. 
> 
> Fully agreed.
> 
>> […] They get away with this in SLE12 because it's roughly the first time
>> btrfs is available in a supported fashion. […]
> 
> Well, it's supported since SLE11SP2 already, which is more than two
> years old, but the point in the end is the same, yes. But FWIW, it seems
> that simply how they work afaics, as they do something similar to ext4, too:
> 
> http://kernel.opensuse.org/cgit/kernel-source/tree/patches.suse/ext4-unsupported-features.patch?h=SLE12
> 
> CU
> knurd
> 

Interesting, bigalloc and checksums - yeah, I probably would have chosen those,
too, for now.

I think there's a little difference, though, in that bigalloc in particular,
and checksums to some degree, are really kind of niche / corner case features of
ext4.  (Who here even knew ext4 had a "bigalloc" feature, raise your hand!)

The list of unsupported btrfs features seems like a lot of core advertised
functionality - no compression, no raid5, no device replace, no btrfs receive...

-Eric