Hello Jan and all, On 2013-09-06 T 18:35 +0200 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Friday 2013-09-06 Matthias G. Eckermann wrote:
On 2013-09-06 T 09:51 +0200 Dirk Müller wrote:
[...] what would be the personal reason for _me_ to switch or for the intended target group of openSUSE in general? [...] What are the alternatives to btrfs? How does it meet the majority of requirements better than the current default choice?
Besides Scalability there are other attributes where btrfs exceeds other filesystems. See various comparison tables out there, including the one in my blog from three years ago (yes, it's a bit dated): https://www.suse.com/communities/conversations/data-is-customers-gold/
Since somewhat-dated data seems to be popular, here is another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FegjLbCnoBw
in this talk, David Chinner showed at LCA 2012 that btrfs was rather non-scaling (for the features it shares with existing filesystems, IOW, just vanilla storing).
I am afraid, we have a wording issue here: When Dave says "Scalability" in that presentations, he means "Performance" (see his slides). When I say "Scalability" above, and use that word comparing btrfs to the current openSUSE default, I am not talking Performance, but talking about "Scalability" in the sense of filesystem size, dealing with huge amounts of (small) files, ... Hope this explains the different view. so long - MgE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org