Originally posted by DrYak
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Bcachefs Completes Core Feature Work, Could Merge Soon If Review Goes Well
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by gorgone View Postomg not another one ....
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ermo View PostI think the review thread on LKML is interesting mainly because (AIUI) Dave Chinner is telling Linus that a specific piece of (supposedly generic) kernel code for managing locks is broken enough that it's caused the xfs devs so much pain that Dave refuses to rely on it, while Linus wants it to be stress-tested and stabilised.
One could easily be led to suspect that perhaps the Linux kernel is -- to paraphrase the inimitable Eddie Izzard -- being held together by string, duct-tape and a note from Linus' mother.
- Likes 1
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by hotaru View Posthave they fixed this bug yet?
Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...Corruption-Hit
I'm not aware of the proper fix being done yet.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by DrYak View Post
That's why, before merging any new filesystem into the kernel, a sponsorship from a company is required.
If Kent drops the ball and moves onto something else, the company relying upon BcacheFS can pay another dev (or a few) to do maintenance.
(see BTRFS and Oracle/Facebook/SUSE).
Kent has found a company sponsoring BcacheFS (they use it on NAS boxes), and that company apparently is insisting on him finishing a few key features (extrefs, which will lead to CoW snapshots - though not necessarily before merging)
The promise of support is great, but if it takes 6 months for the new dev to get up to speed before low level yet important bugs can be fixed...
It is awesome that a company is sponsoring him already, I had no idea.
Thank you for the link, I'll read into it right away.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by geearf View PostYet I am concerned that Kent may abandon this project eventually like he did with bcache, so before a merge we might need a few devs with full understanding of the codebase.
If Kent drops the ball and moves onto something else, the company relying upon BcacheFS can pay another dev (or a few) to do maintenance.
(see BTRFS and Oracle/Facebook/SUSE).
Kent has found a company sponsoring BcacheFS (they use it on NAS boxes), and that company apparently is insisting on him finishing a few key features (extrefs, which will lead to CoW snapshots - though not necessarily before merging)
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by hotaru View Posthave they fixed this bug yet?
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...uption-Linux-5
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...Corruption-Hit
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by mmstick View Post
Honestly, I doubt there's any measurable difference. Placing drivers in the kernel doesn't magically make them faster, either.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by mmstick View PostHonestly, I'd rather that we move all file system drivers to user space.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Britoid View Post
Wasn't the functionality of bcache merged in with bcachefs?
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: