Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Btrfs File-System Changes Published For Linux 3.13

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    13,405

    Default Btrfs File-System Changes Published For Linux 3.13

    Phoronix: Btrfs File-System Changes Published For Linux 3.13

    The Linux 3.13 kernel brings major enhancements to Samsung's F2FS file-system but the EXT4 and XFS changes aren't too exciting. How are the Btrfs changes for this next kernel? We now know thanks to a new pull request from Chris Mason...

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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    980

    Default

    I want btrfs to be finalized. I want to use Wayland with KDE 5. I want Lightworks to be released. I want CS:GO.

    I want these things, stop making me wait!

    Also, HL3 Linux Exclusive.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    145

    Default

    I would not count on btrfs being "finalized" any time soon.

    The btrfs project was never very focused and directed. Now that Mason no longer works for Oracle, the project seems even more directionless than before. There are a number of people fixing bugs, but there always seem to be more bugs being discovered, and the important issues do not seem to get fixed or completed (qgroups, free space, parity RAID, snapshots, etc.)

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by monraaf View Post
    Also, HL3 Linux Exclusive.
    You forgot to mention Portal 2.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    360

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwilliams View Post
    ...There are a number of people fixing bugs, but there always seem to be more bugs being discovered, and the important issues do not seem to get fixed or completed (qgroups, free space, parity RAID, snapshots, etc.)
    Care to elaborate? What's the issue with snapshotting and parity RAID (besides not being fully implemented)?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benmoran View Post
    Care to elaborate? What's the issue with snapshotting and parity RAID (besides not being fully implemented)?
    You do not consider not "being fully implemented" an issue? And no 3-parity RAID like ZFS RAIDZ3.

    snapshots are not as flexible as on ZFS, there still seem to be various bugs reported for people making many snapshots, and it seems that most distro developers think that the btrfs snapshot capability is insufficient to implement a convenient system rollback feature at the bootloader stage

    But the biggest issue by far is the free space issue. Finding the free space is complicated, managing it is difficult even with the buggy quota functionality, and it is a major hassle to deal with a full btrfs filesystem.

    btrfs cannot equal the functionality of ZFS, nor the stability of ZFS, despite having been in development for 6 years now. (yes, I know ZFS has been in development since 2001, but ZFS had a stable release in 2005, and since most of the functionality in btrfs was already known and understood when btrfs development started since ZFS already pioneered it, we should expect btrfs development to be even faster than ZFS)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,907

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwilliams View Post
    You do not consider not "being fully implemented" an issue? And no 3-parity RAID like ZFS RAIDZ3.

    snapshots are not as flexible as on ZFS, there still seem to be various bugs reported for people making many snapshots, and it seems that most distro developers think that the btrfs snapshot capability is insufficient to implement a convenient system rollback feature at the bootloader stage

    But the biggest issue by far is the free space issue. Finding the free space is complicated, managing it is difficult even with the buggy quota functionality, and it is a major hassle to deal with a full btrfs filesystem.

    btrfs cannot equal the functionality of ZFS, nor the stability of ZFS, despite having been in development for 6 years now. (yes, I know ZFS has been in development since 2001, but ZFS had a stable release in 2005, and since most of the functionality in btrfs was already known and understood when btrfs development started since ZFS already pioneered it, we should expect btrfs development to be even faster than ZFS)
    BTRFS doesn't have to be better than ZFS, just EXT4.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwilliams View Post
    You do not consider not "being fully implemented" an issue? And no 3-parity RAID like ZFS RAIDZ3.

    snapshots are not as flexible as on ZFS, there still seem to be various bugs reported for people making many snapshots, and it seems that most distro developers think that the btrfs snapshot capability is insufficient to implement a convenient system rollback feature at the bootloader stage
    Lack of a feature is not a bug by any stretch.

    Why would you want rollback at the bootloader stage? Either do that after boot (if it's a small issue; it's already done by Snapper) or after the boot of the recovery environment (you need one in case of a serious issue anyway).

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    Lack of a feature is not a bug by any stretch.

    Why would you want rollback at the bootloader stage? Either do that after boot (if it's a small issue; it's already done by Snapper) or after the boot of the recovery environment (you need one in case of a serious issue anyway).
    Who said lack of a feature is a bug?

    Quite a few people would like to be able to choose a rollback snapshot at bootloader time, judging from the effort that has been put in to accomplish it. But so far it has failed to work well with btrfs.

    I'm not sure what you are talking about "do that after boot". You have to reboot to boot from a different snapshot.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    BTRFS doesn't have to be better than ZFS, just EXT4.
    Unfortunately, btrfs is worse than ext4 in several ways, primarily reliability and free space issues, but also it is a poor choice for a swap file or for a large, random access file like that for a VM.

Posting Permissions

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