On 2 Dec 2012 09:49 +0100, from riccardo...@gmail.com (Riccardo Berto): > I'm a btrfs user since I encountered the ext4 3.6.2 bug and then I > decided to switch.
> Now it seems to work fine, I will stick with this fs until your needs > in order to give you logs to better understand what happened. Glad it worked out for you. I didn't reply because I felt I didn't know enough to be able to offer any insights. However, you _are_ aware that btrfs is hardly ready for prime time, right? If you want stability, then ext3 or ext4 probably are better choices, despite the kernel 3.6.2 bug. ext3 (and to some extent ext4, because of its roots in the former) are considered time proven by now and the tools to work with the file systems are mature; btrfs and tools are still in heavy development. If you want btrfs's ZFS-like features and can live with another file system on the root partition (or lots of fiddling to get it working), want something that is more ready for prime time and can live with a system that is not purely Free software, perhaps look into running ZFS through FUSE. At the very least, if you decide to keep using btrfs, you should make sure that you have good backups of _everything_ stored on btrfs file systems. I do believe that everyone is doing their best to avoid bugs slipping into the code, but that goes for the ext4 developers too. Nobody _wants_ their name attached to a buggy commit, _particularly_ if that bug causes data loss in production environments. -- Michael Kjörling • http://michael.kjorling.se • mich...@kjorling.se “People who think they know everything really annoy those of us who know we don’t.” (Bjarne Stroustrup) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
