On 04/30/2015 09:43 AM, Rodney Baker wrote:
Um ,yeah, there's a problem - it's called BTRFS.
;)
I'm reminded at this point about electoral politics. Example: the party whose representative didn't make it to the presidency bitches about that fact. The reality is that bitching isn't going to change that. It isn't going to change the adoption of BtrFS. Just like you hope the prez will do good stuff, we hope that BtrFS will get cleaned up and work properly. In the mean time you have alternatives. Strangely enough the supposedly orphaned ReiserFS got a state of high reliability PDQ. Using ReiserFS on LVM offers many of the supposed advantages of BtrFS, without the hassle of snapshots running amok but without the SSD tweaks. I'm sticking with ReiserFS for production for the moment. I'll keep a play machine for BtrFS. Ext4? Sorry, I'm not going to get bitten by inode exhaustion again, and i think having to massively over-provision is a ridiculous strategy. Better to have the integrated b-tree as well as the 'stuffing' of ReiserFS. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org