Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Linux 5.16.5 Released To Fix Up Btrfs' Botched Up Defragging

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Linux 5.16.5 Released To Fix Up Btrfs' Botched Up Defragging

    Phoronix: Linux 5.16.5 Released To Fix Up Btrfs' Botched Up Defragging

    Linux 5.16.5 is out today and making it a notable point release is it fixed up the rather botched state of the Btrfs file-system code for the v5.16 kernel...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...6-Better-Btrfs

  • #2
    Bugtrfs.

    Comment


    • #3
      I hope this will not cause "regressions" in the rising reputation of btfs. Its not long ago that btrfs was still deemed as unstable.

      Comment


      • #4
        actually, the news title is a bit of click bait

        the kernel has the usual amount of bug fixes in all the areas, plus, some fixes related to btrfs defrag.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
          I hope this will not cause "regressions" in the rising reputation of btfs. Its not long ago that btrfs was still deemed as unstable.
          Why are you more concerned about the reputation of a filesystem rather than the actual quality of it?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Space Heater View Post

            Why are you more concerned about the reputation of a filesystem rather than the actual quality of it?
            Fair point, but I have to admit I find myself concerned with the reputation of Linux and not just its quality. I think its quality is great, and I want it to have a good reputation so that others use it since (1) I think that many people don't know that they would actually really like it and (2) a larger user base would feed back into the quality (and of the quality of third-party things supporting it). I guess the same type of argument could be made for a filesystem.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by xuwang View Post

              Fair point, but I have to admit I find myself concerned with the reputation of Linux and not just its quality. I think its quality is great, and I want it to have a good reputation so that others use it since (1) I think that many people don't know that they would actually really like it and (2) a larger user base would feed back into the quality (and of the quality of third-party things supporting it). I guess the same type of argument could be made for a filesystem.
              Reputation should reflect the quality. If there are regular regressions, it should affect the reputation, not just of a single fs but for the kernel on the whole. The goal should to push for more quality control - automated tests and so forth rather than hide the problem.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by HD7950 View Post
                Bugtrfs.
                It's painful that I have to agree with you ...

                ZoL ...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CochainComplex View Post
                  I hope this will not cause "regressions" in the rising reputation of btfs. Its not long ago that btrfs was still deemed as unstable.
                  Don't think it needs any help there 😉 admittedly I'm no expert on brtfs, but from what I have read/heard, I do wonder how it lost its experimental/unstable flag. The whole architecture sounds flawed.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Not sure why this is getting blown up so much. Performance regression in a new major release that now got fixed. It's also by far not the only thing that got fixed in 5.16.5 or was broken in 5.16.0

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X