Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: Btrfs Filesystem In Linux 3.6 Kernel Has Big Changes

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niemand View Post
    is it no possible to repair a broken Btrfs - had this month's ago after crash, my $Home was close to dead.

    @Markore is it possible to use ZFS with Linux - thought only for BSD?
    I think there is a tool for repairing btrfs.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    44

    Default

    There is a tool btrfsck but it will only tell you your file system is broken. It won't fix it. A working btrfsck has been promised since the begging of time but appears to have fallen by the wayside. That is a blocker for Fedora to make btrfs the default but that hasn't stopped others like Oracle. If your FS is borked there are things you can try though I don't remember the links off the top of my head.But I would try btrfsck first to see what it has to say.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeepDayze View Post
    Or perhaps BTRFS is more of a ZFS replacement with many of the features of ZFS, considering the patents and the license surrounding ZFS.
    How sweet, as long as this is pre-alpha crap and not production-ready (ex: tested in critical and big enviroments and debugged like ZFS is) ... it's replacement for nothing.
    The patent thing is bullshit, because if the same functionality is implemented, even if it's new code with GPL, it would violate the patents nonetheless ... that's why the ZFS code, which is under the CDDL, has a patent license grant clause

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vertexSymphony View Post
    How sweet, as long as this is pre-alpha crap and not production-ready (ex: tested in critical and big enviroments and debugged like ZFS is) ... it's replacement for nothing.
    The patent thing is bullshit, because if the same functionality is implemented, even if it's new code with GPL, it would violate the patents nonetheless ... that's why the ZFS code, which is under the CDDL, has a patent license grant clause
    Another Solaris fan that just hasn't gotten over the fact that Solaris/Sun is dead I take it? CDDL was a complete failure as a licence because it wasn't an open license it was basically the same as Microsofts "open" licenses. Sun had the right idea but could never sack up enough to take the company there. BTW btrfs was started by Oracle who also owns ZFS now.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,559

    Default

    Solaris may be dead but it still has some very nice features that have yet to be replicated elsewhere. One of those is ZFS.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jvillain View Post
    Another Solaris fan that just hasn't gotten over the fact that Solaris/Sun is dead I take it? CDDL was a complete failure as a licence because it wasn't an open license it was basically the same as Microsofts "open" licenses. Sun had the right idea but could never sack up enough to take the company there.
    ┐Solaris fan? lol, no ... instead of playing guessing, just ask, Solaris IS DEAD (With IllumOS I kinda don't know, seems dead despite the progress made )
    ZFS was the crown's jewel, no need to be "a fan" to recognize the technical merit behind it. Independently of the platform ... ZFS runs on IllumOS, FreeBSD and OS X ... haiku is implementing it afaik, too.

    So it's just funny when you say "Solaris fan" when you see all those platforms, please, educate yourself → http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZFS#Platforms

    And ... ┐have you read the license? if not, please do (THE LICENSE, not the GNU's stance on the license, make your own interpretations, even the purists recognize the license as "copyleft", "per file copyleft" some people might say ... the "dont use it because allows linking with propietary software" argument that GNU's made is ridiculous when you ask yourself WHY does LGPL exists in the first place)

    BTW btrfs was started by Oracle who also owns ZFS now.
    Yes, being "owner" is not a synonym of "developer" ... Most of the Sun engineers have "left the building" (ZFS team included) ... so, what's the point in making a "not invented here" syndrome kind of argument?

    ZFS is still evolving on its own, WITHOUT Oracle ... with a community behind it, in fact, implementations started to diverge from ZFS v29-31 and now, differences got deeper with the add of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REzvy59jQnw

    Again, educate yourself → http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zRN7XLCRhc
    Last edited by vertexSymphony; 07-27-2012 at 08:44 PM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jvillain View Post
    There is a tool btrfsck but it will only tell you your file system is broken. It won't fix it.
    Not true anymore. btrfs-progs in git has had a working fsck for quite a while now. Only thing missing is 0.20 so distributions picks it up.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    51

    Red face ZFS is production.

    Quote Originally Posted by niemand View Post
    is it no possible to repair a broken Btrfs - had this month's ago after crash, my $Home was close to dead.

    @Markore is it possible to use ZFS with Linux - thought only for BSD?
    Of course. ZFS is used on Linux for LUSTRE cluster file system and most people that used to develpo it for Sun are now in companies outside of Oracle, developing it further.
    CERN use ZFSOnLinux for its physics measurements that could not have any errors
    and Zfs on Linux is used to make petabyte storage (PB).
    - If it is good enough for science laboratories, it is good enough for me.

    One can simply add PPA for Ubuntu, for instance when booting from Live CD and install system on Newly made or existing ZFS.
    ZFS on Linux for Lustre : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGjzkgnxgKc
    http://zfsonlinux.org/
    Sequoia's 55PB Lustre+ZFS Filesystem : http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=c5ASf53v4lI

    New ZFS futures of OpenSource ZFS (outside Oracle, therefore Illumos as upstream, BSD people also develop it).
    Newest for ZFS are so called "feature flags" that make ZFS compatible across platforms (Illumos,FreeBSD,Linux).

    I have Both several Illumos based Openindiana 151a5 and Ubuntu Linux and are planing to install FreeBSD.
    All from One partition from one disk
    (Using Zfs datasets/ Boot environments (currently booting from OI's GRUB1 but article state also native Linux ZFS boot).
    - Althrough ZFS is best when making fault-tolerant disk arrays and combining it with transparent SSD storage that speeds up whole disks pool.

    https://launchpad.net/~zfs-native/+archive/stable
    HOWTO install Ubuntu to a Native ZFS Root Filesystem :
    https://github.com/dajhorn/pkg-zfs/w...oot-Filesystem

    Not only ZFS is active and Illumos is alive, but ZFS is only filesystem you can count on to be supported on all platforms (Windows remain to be ported to
    CDDL is not a problem, since it is a Linux module connected to LGPL kernel parts , aether compiled before install or separately, like any driver.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Markore View Post
    ZFS is only filesystem you can count on to be supported on all platforms (Windows remain to be ported to
    Fat32 and UDF?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    374

    Default

    I've been using BTRFS on three machines for a few months, and really liking it so far. Not a single issue. In fact, the only time I've lost data on BTRFS was a few versions ago, due to not fully understanding adding/removing drives. It didn't (and still doesn't) offer a lot of warnings against letting you hose your system. Not really a fault of BTRFS though. Anyways, I'm currently running the 3.4 Kernel and newest applicible btrfs-tools, and it's been a smooth experience so far.

    As a test I'm actually running a 4 disk BTRFS RAID1 array - where all four disks are loaded with bad sectors. They are all old disks in the process of failing. So far, BTRFS has handled the situation flawlessly. I look forward to doing a similar test with the RAID5/6, once it's ready. What better way to test the resiliance, IMO.

    As for ZFS, it really is a nice filesystem. Despite the continued development, however, I can see it eventually getting surpassed by BTRFS. Whatever your opinion of the license issue is, the simple fact is that it won't ever be included in a default Linux install. A lot of enterprises simply wont install a 3rd party file system for a varient of reasons. Because of that, BTRFS will eventually (not going to guess on the time frame here ) be in much wider spread use than ZFS. That is, as long as ext4 is any indication, and nothing else amazing comes along. I do agree that for those with the know-how and the need, it's probably the best choice to use RIGHT NOW.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •