Originally posted by RahulSundaram
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bcachefs Merges Support For Btrfs-Like Snapshots
Collapse
X
-
- Likes 1
-
Originally posted by Tuxie View PostMy home file server uses a combination of Bcache, LUKS, XFS and mergerfs, with SnapRAID for asynchronous redundancy/parity. A single SSD provides read and writeback block cache for 10 HDDs, and SnapRAID will snapshot parity for those 10 disks onto 2 parity disks every 6 hours. The upside of this setup over conventional (including ZFS) raid is that most HDDs will be spun down most of the time, meaning they are silent, use little power and generate little heat. Thanks to Bcache, they don't even spin up for ls or find most of the time, because the metadata blocks are on the SSD most of the time. Another upside is that I can mix HDD sizes and make full use of all of them, given that the parity disks are at least as large as the largest data disk. For read-mostly file systems that are mainly used for archival, it's a perfect compromise! I have a separate SSD-only filesystem for highly volatile data.
- Likes 8
Comment
-
Originally posted by intelfx View Post
People usually go "I used btrfs, got disappointed and now I'm happy with the enterpriZe-gradeâ„¢ zfs" or the other way around, what made you disappointed in both of them?
i dont like that it is not possible to extend raidz - this is about to change. but afaik extending doesnt lead to a better layout.
atm i use integritysetup (checksums on ssd) - mdadm - cryptsetup - lvm - ext4. which works really great and without any performance issues.
but it lacks comfort. i have to make custom initramfs hooks and it takes a long time to initialize a new drive
Comment
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
Looks like Bcachefs might become my root in another year. I'm wanting a replacement for BTRFS and it's currently a competition between Bcachefs and F2FS.
So how many of y'all write F@FS the first time instead of F2FS?
Thats quite a change, isn't it? BTRFS is a high overhead, "everything and the kitchen sink" type FS, while f2fs and (probably) bcachefs are low overhead, more barebones type fs.
That being said, 5.15 f2fs has given me pretty much everything I would want from a simple flash FS.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brucethemoose View Post(probably) bcachefs are low overhead, more barebones type fs.
all of those features are marked stable (considierung its small user base take this with a grain of salt).
i wouldnt call that low overhead.
- Likes 7
Comment
-
Originally posted by atmartens View Post
You should publish a guide.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by You- View Post
It's not like oracle has ever sued anyone over licencing...
The issue with ZFS is that it's license is incompatible with GPL 2, it has nothing to do with Oracle potentially suing ZFS.
- Likes 2
Comment
Comment