On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjo...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:15:59PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote: >> I will be unable to attend tomorrow but I have concerns of making btrfs >> default without a well tested fsck. I'm aware one is due soon but I don't >> believe 3-4 months is enough time to test it well enough. On 2.6.38.x I >> still get regular kernel abrt crashes on resume. Is it even marked stable in >> the upstream kernel yet? > > Another concern is whether btrfs is going to work well to store > virtual machine disk images (ie. to replace LVM for that purpose, > where LVM is known to work very efficiently). > > Last time I looked -- which I admit was a really long time ago -- it > behaved fairly pathologically with these huge monolithic files that > are rewritten in-place. > > (Edit: just noticed this bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689127 ) >
These sort of issues are my priority and I've spent the last 2 months specifically working on the kvm performance differences between ext4 and btrfs. Now we're not on par with ext4 yet, but we aren't 2-3 times slower any more, maybe at the most we're 20% slower. Thanks, Josef -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
