Comment by nosequel
6 years ago
btrfs is not at all reliable, so if you care about your files staying working files, it probably doesn't meet your requirements. It is like the MongoDB 0.1 of filesystems.
6 years ago
btrfs is not at all reliable, so if you care about your files staying working files, it probably doesn't meet your requirements. It is like the MongoDB 0.1 of filesystems.
Seems pretty reliable these days. Are you commenting based upon personal experience? If so, when was it that you used btrfs?
When it comes to file systems “pretty reliable” these days does not sound very good. Reliability had to have been a fundamental requirement for design of a file system. If not, it sounds like putting lipstick on a pig.
Redhat throwing towel on their support for development does not instill confidence either.
Nothing personally against Btrfs. Just an end user making a file system choice saying what I care about.
re Redhat deprecating btrfs:
> People are making a bigger deal of this than it is. Since I left Red Hat in 2012 there hasn't been another engineer to pick up the work, and it is _a lot_ of work.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14909843
I have a laptop running opensuse, with root on btrfs. Twice I have had to reinstall because it managed to corrupt the file system.