Btrfs Gets More RAID 5/6 Fixes In Linux 4.16

[pal666]

When is the year of BTRFS 5/6 ? I've been on and working well raid 1 for a few years now.

you can continue, raid1 is faster anyway

[pal666]

I am confident btrfs will become as mature and stable as ZFS eventually, but I'm not confident that time is now.

you can be confident that there is no mature and stable zfs on linux

[pal666]

Red Hat dumping it in favour of extending XFS

not really. btrfs devs dumping redhat in favor of other employers

[pal666]

(this is different from snapshots as versions store old versions more continuously rather than periodically).

how much continuity do you expect? should it make new version for every byte written?

[gbcox]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The BTRFS ship has sailed. This sentence is telling:

The Btrfs code for this kernel will also try harder to rebuild damaged data in RAID5/RAID6 arrays.

Nice - good to know that it is going to "try" harder. Kent Overstreet's assessment is spot on:

btrfs, which was supposed to be Linux's next generation COW filesystem - Linux's answer to zfs. Unfortunately, too much code was written too quickly without focusing on getting the core design correct first, and now it has too many design mistakes baked into the on disk format and an enormous, messy codebase - bigger that xfs. It's taken far too long to stabilize as well - poisoning the well for future filesystems because too many people were burned on btrfs, repeatedly (e.g. Fedora's tried to switch to btrfs multiple times and had to switch at the last minute, and server vendors who years ago hoped to one day roll out btrfs are now quietly migrating to xfs instead).

[duby229]

Yeah, it's definitely past time for linux filesystem developers to get over BTRFS and start something new. Redhat may not be on the right track, so the kernels filesystem devs need to get crackin'. And soon.

[gbcox]

Yeah, it's definitely past time for linux filesystem developers to get over BTRFS and start something new. Redhat may not be on the right track, so the kernels filesystem devs need to get crackin'. And soon.

I believe the answer may be bcachefs.

[dcrdev]

you can be confident that there is no mature and stable zfs on linux

Care to put some context around that statement?

In what sense is it not stable (apart from being out-of-tree) - it's pretty much at feature parity with OpenZFS on BSD and Illumos, has far exceeded the feature set of Oracle ZFS. Performance differences between ZoL and BSD are negligible and the gaps are swiftly closing in on Illumos.

My experience with ZoL has been far from unstable.

I honestly wouldn't trust my data on any other filesystem at this moment in time, but in the future I don't believe btrfs will win the battle of Linux filesystems, bcachefs is where my moneys at - it's just extremely well-thought out from the get go.

[starshipeleven]

Yeah, it's definitely past time for linux filesystem developers to get over BTRFS and start something new. Redhat may not be on the right track, so the kernels filesystem devs need to get crackin'. And soon.

Yeah, let's interrupt something when it's like 70% done and start anew just because we are impatient.

[starshipeleven]

I believe the answer may be bcachefs.

What's the status of bcachefs? Is that just faith or you actually saw/tested something promising beyond some words on a Patreon page?