Btrfs Seeing Some Nice Performance Improvements For Linux 5.9

[dev_null]

What distro? Ubuntu is known for btrfs horror stories. I've been following btrfs mailing list and a lot of the people asking for help are from some random Ubuntu LTS using older kernels.

In other distros like OpenSUSE where btrfs is default filesystem it doesn't blow up like that. Now also on Fedora will become first-class citizen.

gentoo.

[starshipeleven]

This makes me wonder whether I should use ZFS or Btrfs for my next Ubuntu install. I’m leaning towards ZFS because the official support is likely to be stronger.

+1 for ZFS, Ubuntu or not.

[starshipeleven]

The same happened to me ~5 years ago with Arch Linux, but I still use btrfs because there are no better alternatives.

Well, if it didn't happen again it's OK I guess?

[cynical]

This makes me wonder whether I should use ZFS or Btrfs for my next Ubuntu install. I’m leaning towards ZFS because the official support is likely to be stronger.

[vladpetric]

you mean for benchmarking speed of filesystem resize?

Some of the benchmarks (e.g., sqlite, postgres) use fsync ... The degree to which they are sped up is TBD.

[darkbasic]

What distro? Ubuntu is known for btrfs horror stories. I've been following btrfs mailing list and a lot of the people asking for help are from some random Ubuntu LTS using older kernels.

In other distros like OpenSUSE where btrfs is default filesystem it doesn't blow up like that. Now also on Fedora will become first-class citizen.

The same happened to me ~5 years ago with Arch Linux, but I still use btrfs because there are no better alternatives.

[S.Pam]

Hot data tracking/balancing is already considered

[waxhead]

i don't see how it will be different from separate filesystem on those disks with subvolumes assigned to it, which you could do now

Right now there is not much of a difference, but in the long run this could allow for parity based raid where the stripes are on fast groups of disks and the parity on slower devices. And a disk failure could use a different group as spare space or redundant space. It works also make it easier to isolate metadata on its own controller for example. Plus migrationomigration data would not be across filesystems. It all boils down to flexibility.

[starshipeleven]

Are we supposed to be impressed?

Yes, yes we are.

[starshipeleven]

Couple of years ago I lost 2TB volume because of btrfs bug. and a tool to fix the fs made everything much worse. Now I do not treat it seriously, at least wont put there what I want to find tomorrow. This never happened with ext4. Probably things enhance with a time, but I’m just scary.

What distro? Ubuntu is known for btrfs horror stories. I've been following btrfs mailing list and a lot of the people asking for help are from some random Ubuntu LTS using older kernels.

In other distros like OpenSUSE where btrfs is default filesystem it doesn't blow up like that. Now also on Fedora will become first-class citizen.