There's Talk Again About Btrfs For Fedora

[jwilliams]

Chris Mason is no Jeff Bonwick. I doubt many people would want to use a Mason distro. Sun, on the other hand, was trusted by a lot of people for putting out a dependable OS.

[xeekei]

ZFS was developed for Solaris, by Sun. How can you know that if Chris Mason had his own distro that he wouldn't have used Btrfs already?
Going by when Sun started to trust ZFS enough for default doesn't count in my eyes. they didn't need to convince other distros.

Besides, defaults are just the safe settings for people who don't know what they're doing. Enterprise people do.

[jwilliams]

SUSE recommends ROOT filesystem be Btrfs and you are still claiming they don't trust it? I cannot take you seriously anymore.

Oh, that hurts! I am not being taken seriously by someone who cannot even follow the thread of a simple conversation.

You are grasping at straws. Let me try to make it simple for you. If the SUSE developers trusted btrfs, it would be the default filesystem without the user needing to select it. What one person writes in the documentation means little. What the distro actually does, and whether it defaults to btrfs filesystem automatically, is the real indicator.

btrfs is not the default filesystem for SUSE, or any other major distro. Clearly SUSE, as well as all the other major linux distros, think btrfs is not ready to be trusted as the default filesystem.

[RahulSundaram]

Those are not indicators. Those "appliances" are small-time, niche products. If SUSE actually trusted btrfs, they would have it as the default filesystem.

SUSE recommends ROOT filesystem be Btrfs and you are still claiming they don't trust it? I cannot take you seriously anymore.

[jwilliams]

There are appliances that are in the market with Btrfs as default and SUSE recommends Btrfs as root filesystem as well. I don't think you can ignore all these indicators.

Those are not indicators. Those "appliances" are small-time, niche products. If SUSE actually trusted btrfs, they would have it as the default filesystem.

What no rational person can ignore is that no major linux distro trusts btrfs enough to have it be the default filesystem. That shows that btrfs cannot be trusted for widespread, serious usage. btrfs is simply not ready for prime-time, despite nearly 6 years of development. It is hard not to wonder if btrfs will ever be trustworthy.

[RahulSundaram]

An even better indicator is that none of those vendors trust btrfs enough to make it the default filesystem.

This isn't true. There are appliances that are in the market with Btrfs as default and SUSE recommends Btrfs as root filesystem as well. I don't think you can ignore all these indicators.

https://www.linux.com/news/enterprise/systems-management/677226-suse-linux-says-btrfs-is-ready-to-rock

[ryao]

That's where we disagree. Production level deployments and commercial support from multiple vendors are strong indicators of the maturity level of the filesystem.

Is there is good way to measure production deployments?

[jwilliams]

Production level deployments and commercial support from multiple vendors are strong indicators of the maturity level of the filesystem.

An even better indicator is that none of those vendors trust btrfs enough to make it the default filesystem.

[ryao]

Well, one would think porting DTrace would lessen the differentiation but they did that.

DTrace is a debugging feature. It does not affect production use outside of possible performance tuning.

[RahulSundaram]

Which is irrelevant to my comment that btrfs still does not have a conservative distro that uses btrfs as the default filesystem. .

That's where we disagree. Production level deployments and commercial support from multiple vendors are strong indicators of the maturity level of the filesystem.