Re: Stability of Btrfs in Kernel 3.0

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hey Martin,

On 04/06/2015 15:55:49, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
BTRFS and Kernel 3.0?

Unless its has a newer BTRFS version or at least critical fixed
backported, I would run away from it.

Free space management in Kernel 3.0 still had issues that even with 2
GiB free the filesystem could report its full, while also denying to rm
a file, delete a subvolume or do anything else to mitigate the
situation. I have seen this on SLES 11 SP 3.

I suggest something newer. Really.

Or, if you still want to use it:

If you want to store 50 GiB, keep 50 GiB of space free, or at least
20-30 GiB. I.e. have plenty of free space on the device. Do not fill up
the filesystem.

Or well… use another filesystem on that device.

In addition meanwhile there will be a ton of other issues with such an
old BTRFS fixed.

So until you can´t get a newer kernel for that device, I would not use
it with BRFS.

thanks for the quick and precise answer. I will find out whether Netgear
did some backporting for btrfs in their kernel and report back.

Unfortunately Netgear uses only btrfs (or zfs on some systems) and one
cannot select another fs like ext4 (which they supported on previous
systems).

Regards,

Max
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux