Bcachefs Submits Lots Of Fixes For "Extreme Filesystem Damage" With Linux 6.9

[cynic]

You do realize that technically that statement is still correct? As long as you can recover your data it hasn't been eaten. I mean this is also a basic property of CoW filesystems, something that btrfs has actually broken in the past (albeit sparingly)

do you realize that this is just mirror climbing?

[Old Grouch]

if you are doubting my claims, feel free to prove me wrong.

The proof is in the fact that, as of this posting, there are not "*hundreds* comments on Phoronix bashing btrfs and depiciting bcachefs as the ultimate-absolutely-perfect fs from the gods."

You don't need to give hundreds of links to postings: just 5 with the attributes of "bashing btrfs and depiciting bcachefs as the ultimate-absolutely-perfect fs" would be a good start.

Your move.

[Old Grouch]

at

do you realize that this is just mirror climbing?

What on earth is "mirror climbing"?

[Old Grouch]

Spelling mistakes are coding errors only in keywords and when you are inconsistent with your spelling. Using loosing instead of losing everywhere will compile just fine, unless you are coding in a language that has either of these words as a keyword.

Whoosh!

[mdedetrich]

do you realize that this is just mirror climbing?

Nope, I don't think you know what CoW means. CoW means that data is always written to a new portion of a disk instead of overriding existing data, so as long as its designed in a proper way (i.e. you still have existing extents pointing to new blocks) you won't lose actual data, at worst you have to do some recovery.

The fact that btrfs as a CoW managed to lose data is whats concerning here. Even with ZFS I managed to get into a situation where there was some corruption, but because of its design I could easily recover the data by forcing a transaction id block.

[cynic]

The proof is in the fact that, as of this posting, there are not "*hundreds* comments on Phoronix bashing btrfs and depiciting bcachefs as the ultimate-absolutely-perfect fs from the gods."

You don't need to give hundreds of links to postings: just 5 with the attributes of "bashing btrfs and depiciting bcachefs as the ultimate-absolutely-perfect fs" would be a good start.

Your move.

I owe you nothing. my aim is not to win an argument with you, and I'm not going to waste my time on it.
I don't know what you aim for. If you are looking for the truth, just make your own research.

[cynic]

at

What on earth is "mirror climbing"?

LOL! I thought it was a more international expression!

quote from: https://learnamo.com/en/idiomatic-expressions-italian/

“Arrampicarsi sugli specchi” (literally “to climb on mirrors”) basically means defending what can’t be defended. Essentially, someone who “climbs on mirrors” tries to find reasons and excuses (usually unfounded) to defend their cause or to justify something, unsuccessfully.

“Ogni volta che fa tardi a lavoro, Roberto si arrampica sugli specchi pur di non essere licenziato. Per esempio, oggi ha detto che il cancello di casa sua non si apriva, allora ha dovuto chiamare il tecnico che però ci ha messo tanto ad arrivare, e nel frattempo suo figlio è caduto dalle scale e si è fatto male al ginocchio, quindi poi ha dovuto portarlo in ospedale.”
Translation: “Every time he’s late for work, Roberto is clutching at straws to avoid being fired. For example, today he said that the gate of his house wouldn’t open, so he had to call the technician but it took him a while to arrive, and in the meantime, his son fell down the stairs and he hurt his knee, so then he had to take him to the hospital.”

[varikonniemi]

damn that tongue in cheek advertisement text on bcachefs homepage seems to trigger some people

Sadly for you it still holds true, bcachefs has not eaten anyone's data yet.

[AndyChow]

this would be a reasonable critics to move to btrfs, except this is not what happened.

the big "The COW filesystem for Linux that won't eat your data" is still there, on bcache site.
This is the emblem of how much arrogant the approach of bcache has been so far.

We warned everyone with this mindset that a modern fs is an hell of a project, and that you have to stay humble until you have decades of usage in the real world.

This is the moment when we proved right.

Do you have reading comprehension problems? The patches submitted aren't bugs that broke data. They are fixes to handle when the filesystem becomes corrupt. A filesystem can become corrupt because of a hardware failure. These patches just handle that better.

There hasn't yet been a data corrupting bug in bcachefs, because it's built on bcache, which has been around a lot longer than btrfs.

And since bcachefs isn't designed by a committee, it's not the mess btrfs is.

Bcache and bcachefs aren't the same thing.

Bcachefs manages to beat btrfs, with 3 programmers vs 1000+ on btrfs, because bcachefs stands on the shoulders on bcache which is ultra stable and sanely designed.

[cynic]

Do you have reading comprehension problems? The patches submitted aren't bugs that broke data. They are fixes to handle when the filesystem becomes corrupt. A filesystem can become corrupt because of a hardware failure. These patches just handle that better.]

I might have reading comprehension problem.
Can you explain me why we are talking abount "splitbrain bug" and "losing interior nodes" and "variety of other damage", then?

they look like bug that make you lose your data.

but maybe it's just me.

There hasn't yet been a data corrupting bug in bcachefs, because it's built on bcache, which has been around a lot longer than btrfs.

And since bcachefs isn't designed by a committee, it's not the mess btrfs is.

Bcache and bcachefs aren't the same thing.

Bcachefs manages to beat btrfs, with 3 programmers vs 1000+ on btrfs, because bcachefs stands on the shoulders on bcache which is ultra stable and sanely designed.

Hey, LinAdmin , does this count as one?

here's what I'm talking about, it has all the elements:

- bcache is absolutely perfect
- written by the gods themselves
- bashing btrfs for no good reasons