On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 09:03:26PM +0100, Hendrik Friedel wrote: > Hi, > > >Well, given the relative immaturity of btrfs as a filesystem at this > >point in its lifetime, I think it's acceptable/tolerable. However, for a > >filesystem feted[1] to ultimately replace the ext* series as an assumed > >Linux default, I'd definitely argue that the current situation should be > >changed such that btrfs can automatically manage its own de-allocation at > >some point, yes, and that said "some point" really needs to come before > >that point at which btrfs can be considered an appropriate replacement > >for ext2/3/4 as the assumed default Linux filesystem of the day. > > Agreed! I hope, this is on the ToDo List?! https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Project_ideas#Block_group_reclaim Yes. :) > >[1] feted: celebrated, honored. I had to look it up to be sure my > >intuition on usage was correct, and indeed I had spelled it wrong > > :-) Did you mean "fated": intended, destined? Hugo. -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 65E74AC0 from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- IMPROVE YOUR ORGANISMS!! -- Subject line of spam email ---
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
