Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bcachefs Lands More Fixes Ahead Of Linux 6.7 Stable Debut

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

  • cynic
    replied
    Originally posted by varikonniemi View Post

    show me where
    just go to bcachefs.org.

    first thing you read is "The COW filesystem for Linux that won't eat your data".

    also, just read some comments on phoronix talking about how much Kent is a good programmer (while all the other are, obviously inferior), how much Kent payed attention to a rigorous development (while other fs are randomly developed), that the fs is so solid that should have been included in linux 0.1 release and so on.

    There's such an hype around the readiness and robustness of bcachefs that is going to make a lot of damage.
    People should have learned something from the btrfs error of being declared stable too soon.

    Leave a comment:


  • varikonniemi
    replied
    Originally posted by cynic View Post

    it was supposed to be already perfect, or at least this is what the fanbois say!
    show me where

    Leave a comment:


  • PuckPoltergeist
    replied
    Originally posted by pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx View Post

    For the filesystems without any internal checksums, did you verify that every file on your machine actually matched what it was supposed to?
    More important, bcachefs must have logged something about these files.

    Leave a comment:


  • guzz46
    replied
    Originally posted by pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx View Post

    For the filesystems without any internal checksums, did you verify that every file on your machine actually matched what it was supposed to?
    Nope, it wasn't a comprehensive test, just a basic test, the video was fine, and the text file was fine, and that was good enough for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx
    replied
    Originally posted by guzz46 View Post

    Well at least in my test xfs doesn't appear to have any issues anymore, neither does f2fs, I don't know what's happening with bcachefs, but personally I wouldn't be using it on my machine.
    For the filesystems without any internal checksums, did you verify that every file on your machine actually matched what it was supposed to?

    Leave a comment:


  • guzz46
    replied
    Originally posted by User29 View Post

    why not reproduce and report?

    losing data during read is a ridiculously dangerous bug.
    Basically I couldn't be bothered, I was just experimenting with different file systems at the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • User29
    replied
    Originally posted by guzz46 View Post

    It should be reproducible, once was enough for me though, all I did was open the file manager, click on the video, which started playing in MPV, then I pressed the reboot button on my PC, then when it rebooted after running fsck the file was at 0 bytes, I don't know if it was the fsck that zeroed out the file?
    why not reproduce and report?

    losing data during read is a ridiculously dangerous bug.

    Leave a comment:


  • guzz46
    replied
    Originally posted by PuckPoltergeist View Post

    Depends on the filesystem. With jfs I would expect something in /lost+found after fsck. I'm not aware of zeroed files after log-replay. XFS had this behavior long time ago, because of delayed allocations. But this happened with file writes.
    Well at least in my test xfs doesn't appear to have any issues anymore, neither does f2fs, I don't know what's happening with bcachefs, but personally I wouldn't be using it on my machine.

    Leave a comment:


  • PuckPoltergeist
    replied
    Originally posted by guzz46 View Post

    It should be reproducible, once was enough for me though, all I did was open the file manager, click on the video, which started playing in MPV, then I pressed the reboot button on my PC, then when it rebooted after running fsck the file was at 0 bytes, I don't know if it was the fsck that zeroed out the file?
    Depends on the filesystem. With jfs I would expect something in /lost+found after fsck. I'm not aware of zeroed files after log-replay. XFS had this behavior long time ago, because of delayed allocations. But this happened with file writes.

    Leave a comment:


  • guzz46
    replied
    Originally posted by PuckPoltergeist View Post

    You're saying you loosed a file that was used read-only during a crash/reset? Is this reproducable?
    It should be reproducible, once was enough for me though, all I did was open the file manager, click on the video, which started playing in MPV, then I pressed the reboot button on my PC, then when it rebooted after running fsck the file was at 0 bytes, I don't know if it was the fsck that zeroed out the file?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X