On 08/04/2016 10:30 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
Keep in mind the list is rather self-selecting for problems. People who aren't having problems are unlikely to post their non-problems to the list.
True, but the number of people inclined to post a bug report to the list is also a lot smaller than the number of people who experienced problems. Personally, I know at least 2 Linux users who happened to get a btrfs filesystem as part of upgrading to a newer Suse distribution on their PC, and both of them experienced trouble with their filesystems that caused them to re-install without using btrfs. They weren't interested in what filesystem they use enough to bother investigating what happened in detail or to issue bug-reports. I'm afraid that btrfs' reputation has already taken damage from the combination of "early deployment as a root filesystem to unsuspecting users" and "being at a development stage where users are likely to experience trouble at some time".
c. Take some risk and use 4.8 rc1 once it's out. Just make sure to keep backups.
We sure do - actually, the possibility to "run daily backups from a snapshot while write performance remains acceptable" is the one and only reason for me to use btrfs rather than xfs for those $HOME dirs. In every other aspect (stability, performance, suitability for storing VM-images or database-files) xfs wins for me. And the btrfs advantage "file system based snapshot being more performant than block device based snapshot" may fade away with the replacement of magnetic disks with SSDs in the long run. Regards, Lutz Vieweg -- 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
