Bcachefs Sees Improved Journal Pipelining & More Efficient Discard With Linux 6.9

[lyamc]

Is that bug found late or...? Where's the fix commit?

https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs.git/commit/?h=bcachefs-for-v6.7&id=2d9720d70a26032492ad3a82765cdfaaf4bd038d

https://evilpiepirate.org/git/bcachefs.git/commit/?h=bcachefs-for-v6.7&id=e50786c7bbb73fb754564802882c7b52511716ed

[mdedetrich]

That's a whataboutism. There's a reason distros didn't use btrfs for 8+ years and it's because it wasn't stable either. You're allowed to be mad at both things.

I don't see how it can be whataboutism seeing as bcachefs was introduced into the Linux kernel literally yesterday in software development terms, thats the whole point I was making. Or to put it differently in one case the software developer put out a fix as soon as he found out about the bug (bcachefs) and in the other case they sat on it for 5+ years (and by sat on it I mean they didn't do the basic of putting a warning since a proper fix requires change to on disk format).

If it was 5+ years old then yeah you could play the "whataboutissm" card.

[Daktyl198]

I don't see how it can be whataboutism seeing as bcachefs was introduced into the Linux kernel literally yesterday in software development terms, thats the whole point I was making. Or to put it differently in one case the software developer put out a fix as soon as he found out about the bug (bcachefs) and in the other case they sat on it for 5+ years (and by sat on it I mean they didn't do the basic of putting a warning since a proper fix requires change to on disk format).

If it was 5+ years old then yeah you could play the "whataboutissm" card.

The definition of "whataboutism" is defending one thing by attacking another. Equivalencies have nothing to do with it. "Yeah, bcachefs has a really bad bug, but what about btrfs". And the answer is that btrfs has literally nothing to do with the bcachefs bug. You only brought up btrfs to steer the discussion away from bcachefs rather than defend it.

Plus, as I mentioned, people hated btrfs for it's instabilities for a literal decade, so to bring it up as a "well what about that?" card doesn't even make sense, as you're trying to appeal to the "well people are fine with that why aren't they fine with this" when that file system had people avoiding (and still avoiding) it like the plague for almost it's entire existence.

[mdedetrich]

The definition of "whataboutism" is defending one thing by attacking another. Equivalencies have nothing to do with it.

Yes but its only whataboutism if you don't defend the original point which I did otherwise its called providing context, i.e. I said that the bcachefs bug was fixed almost immediately. Brining in equivalent forces you to defend the original point, otherwise its impossible to do so.

[Daktyl198]

Yes but its only whataboutism if you don't defend the original point which I did otherwise its called providing context, i.e. I said that the bcachefs bug was fixed almost immediately. Brining in equivalent forces you to defend the original point, otherwise its impossible to do so.

But... you literally didn't defend anything in the original comment I replied to. You didn't say anything about the bug being fixed lmao.

[mdedetrich]

But... you literally didn't defend anything in the original comment I replied to. You didn't say anything about the bug being fixed lmao.

Its implied from the the article?

I mean ffs the filesystem is marked as EXPERIMENTAL in the kernel as well, what more do you want ffs.