Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Btrfs Slated To Make Use Of New Mount API In Linux 6.8

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

  • woddy
    replied
    Originally posted by timofonic View Post
    Slow adoption? I wonder what's more left...
    In the end it's not 20 years later but a couple of years, by the way most users won't notice any difference.
    What else does Btrfs have that Ext4 doesn't? Many things....​

    Leave a comment:


  • LinAdmin
    replied
    Originally posted by muncrief View Post
    Good god, after the latest ZFS disaster I'm no longer trying any new features on any file systems until they've been long tested in the real world.

    [...] as it's obvious no one really knows exactly what's going on. And there's a simple and preventable reason for it - there are no all encompassing architectural documents, specifications, or coverage and fuzz verification suites, for either file system. Instead everyone is just throwing code in and running arbitrary scripts to "prove" the code works.
    I have no doubt that it will take a very long time until the new approach is stable and well tested.

    Leave a comment:


  • writequit
    replied
    "EXT4 switched to it at the end of 2021​"

    Oh, I didn't feel a thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • onlyLinuxLuvUBack
    replied
    Let's start up the genesis of
    Red Sea FS 2:16

    The RedSea file system does not allow files to grow because it only has an allocation bitmap and not a FAT table. This "flaw" is by design. I am intentionally crippling this operating system, making it a toy with the wisdom that this will prevent commercialization and corruption. The toy spirit of the operating system will be preserved going into the future. The vision for this operating system was a modern Commodore 64, which was a fun toy.

    Leave a comment:


  • evert_mouw
    replied
    Originally posted by discordian View Post
    no checksums. with WinBtrfs you can just use it like an exfat partition in windows
    that's a good reason indeed, although exfat is easier (and Mac's also can access exfat)
    but agreed, checksumming is good, I use zfs for important data, exfat is just a toy

    Leave a comment:


  • discordian
    replied
    Originally posted by WileEPyote View Post

    Joined just to find this out. Switched to btrfs a while back because of the easy integration with Windows, and then bought a Steam Deck which pretty much cemented my decision. My only complaint is it's lack of performance compared to ext4. Will this help in that area, better security? What's the benefit for us end users?
    you won't see a difference, perhaps in the future some complicated mount commands will only be possible with filesystems using the new api.

    Leave a comment:


  • discordian
    replied
    Originally posted by evert_mouw View Post

    Why not use exfat when the partition must be shared between Windows and Linux?
    no checksums. with WinBtrfs you can just use it like an exfat partition in windows

    Leave a comment:


  • muncrief
    replied
    Good god, after the latest ZFS disaster I'm no longer trying any new features on any file systems until they've been long tested in the real world. As I posted on the "OpenZFS Is Still Battling A Data Corruption Issue" thread recently, perusing the ZFS and BTRFS developer threads is positively frightening as it's obvious no one really knows exactly what's going on. And there's a simple and preventable reason for it - there are no all encompassing architectural documents, specifications, or coverage and fuzz verification suites, for either file system. Instead everyone is just throwing code in and running arbitrary scripts to "prove" the code works.

    By the way, the Arch AUR zfs-dkms package backported the (cross your fingers) fix for the ZFS corruption issue yesterday. They patched the released 2.2.1 code with "https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/commit/30d581121bb122c90959658e7b28b1672d342897.patch"

    I'd already patched and built my own zfs-dkms with this patch a few days ago and haven't had any obvious problems, but since the issue is silent data corruption, and there are no real guides or verification test suites, it's anyone's guess as to whether or not the problem has really been solved.

    In any case best of luck to the ZFS and BTRFS development teams, and I hope they will heed the advice I lent on the other thread. I greatly appreciate all their hard work, but wow, they all really need to step back and develop the basic specifications, documents, and test suites they should have created in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • evert_mouw
    replied
    Originally posted by WileEPyote View Post

    Joined just to find this out. Switched to btrfs a while back because of the easy integration with Windows, and then bought a Steam Deck which pretty much cemented my decision. My only complaint is it's lack of performance compared to ext4. Will this help in that area, better security? What's the benefit for us end users?
    Why not use exfat when the partition must be shared between Windows and Linux?

    Leave a comment:


  • WileEPyote
    replied
    Originally posted by geearf View Post
    What's the benefit for users of btrfs? I've skimmed the video but didn't get it.
    Joined just to find this out. Switched to btrfs a while back because of the easy integration with Windows, and then bought a Steam Deck which pretty much cemented my decision. My only complaint is it's lack of performance compared to ext4. Will this help in that area, better security? What's the benefit for us end users?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X