openSUSE 13.2 RC1 Is Out & Still Riding On Btrfs

[phoronix]

Phoronix: openSUSE 13.2 RC1 Is Out & Still Riding On Btrfs

Following almost ten thousand downloads of openSUSE 13.2 Beta, the first release candidate is out for this first openSUSE release using the Btrfs file-system by default...

http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTgwODc

[Cyber Killer]

I can't wait ;-).

[stagefright]

+1 to that. Havent used Suse in a while. Debian Sid more than suffices but lets see how this turns out.

[Cyber Killer]

BTW: this prompted me to read up about XFS. It seems to have quite a few kick ass features designed for a storage filesystem, which would make it quite reasonable to use for /home. I have to try it some day.

[GreatEmerald]

I saw their rationale, but the whole "btrfs is too slow" thing doesn't hold water in my opinion. Just what exactly are the desktop/laptop users doing that the speed wouldn't be sufficient... In all the years that I've been using Btrfs I haven't once run into such a situation.

And as a bonus, having everything on one partition means all space is available all the time (with the benefits of them being on different volumes thanks to subvolumes).

[steveriley]

I saw their rationale, but the whole "btrfs is too slow" thing doesn't hold water in my opinion... And as a bonus, having everything on one partition means all space is available all the time (with the benefits of them being on different volumes thanks to subvolumes).

Agreed. It's what I've been running on Kubuntu since 13.10. I'm not perceiving any performance problems here. (ThinkPad T520, 256 GB SSD, LZO compression).

But Plymouth? What in $DEITY's name for? Despite the dire warning I got when I griped on Launchpad bug 556372 (see comment #95 and later), my systems have remained properly functioning without Plymouth for years.

[dfyt]

I saw their rationale, but the whole "btrfs is too slow" thing doesn't hold water in my opinion. Just what exactly are the desktop/laptop users doing that the speed wouldn't be sufficient... In all the years that I've been using Btrfs I haven't once run into such a situation.

And as a bonus, having everything on one partition means all space is available all the time (with the benefits of them being on different volumes thanks to subvolumes).

I stopped using BtrFS when I noticed boot up slow downs on my Raptor drives. XFS is a tad quicker - noticeably.

I've been using Ext4 and BtrFS for years and recently made the switch to XFS. Additional reasons were for my media center pc, which was 2x3TB NTFS. I copied over to Ext4 and it ran out of space...I though it was a symbolic link somewhere and used Rsync - same thing. I ignored it and actually lost data...Using the remaining data I found that with NTFS I had 234GB free, Ext4 7GB free, BtrFS about the same as Ext4 and XFS had 232GB free. I redid the formats multiple times! Also BtrFS average around 90Mb/s whereas XFS was consistenly around the 140MB/s. NTFS 110.

My content was mostly series and large files with 1000's of 10MB RAW images and raw video footage (MTS).

This is something I think most Linux people never test or think of - I certainly didn't. Applying a chmod also takes about 30s vs 11Min. Thats on identical drives. Now I use XFS exclusively and ZFS for my servers.

[Panix]

Anything that is KDE centric sucks - including Kubuntu.

[Cyber Killer]

Anything that is KDE centric sucks - including Kubuntu.

You don't want to start a desktop flamewar.
You want to go home and rethink your life.