On 30 August 2016 at 04:25, Jeff Mahoney
On 8/29/16 5:42 PM, Lindsay Mathieson wrote:
On 30/08/2016 1:56 AM, Ronan Arraes Jardim Chagas wrote:
I just have the problem again. Now, it happens during the lunch time when the machine was idle. Only the system processes were running. It was not the first time that I saw this problem just after lunch when the machine stayed idle for a long period (+- 1h). This time, only the reboot worked, I could not run balance.
Given the debacle over RAID 5/6 and the ongoing issues with stability, and supposedly a very messy codebase, is btrfs still a wise default for installs?
Those are three separate issues. The first is, from our (SUSE) perspective, isn't an issue. We don't support RAID 5/6, full stop. We don't support device replace either, since those features aren't ready for prime time. Those "not supported" rules would apply to openSUSE too, but when I asked about adding the "allow_unsupported" option to openSUSE years ago, we never reached a consensus.
Further to this point - anyone relying on any software RAID5/6 solution, or any hardware solution without either an NV cache or battery backup, is fundamentally stupid and just asking to lose data. btrfs' RAID 5/6 implementation may not be one of the best ones out there, but all of them put data at risk thanks to the wonders of the write hole. Jeff, with Leap being a lot more aligned with SLE, maybe it's time to resurrect the idea of implementing the same "not supported" rules there? I would fully support, without hestitation, "allow_unsupported" on Leap. On Tumbleweed I think there is room for more discussion, but even there I think it's best for openSUSE and btrfs to reflect the 'sane' and 'safe' features by default - if people want to go off the deepend, of course they still can.
Lastly, the stability issues. I mostly see bug reports fall into a few buckets. The "OMG my file system is gone now" bugs haven't been common for a long time. Qgroups bugs are still a problem for a variety of reasons, but we're getting close to squashing the last of them. People do run into ENOSPC occasionally, but nowhere near as often as they did years ago. I think the main thing is that the number of users of btrfs has gone up drastically but the bugs reported haven't.
+1 - I did some research on this a few weeks back, especially comparing zfs (everyones flavour of the month for fancy filesystems on Linux) to btrfs. For the same time period (the creation date of the btrfs bugtracker to date), btrfs has less open bugs, of less severity, and bugs that are reported seem to consistantly be closed more quickly. Looks to me like some people's perceptions of btrfs need to catch up with reality, hopefully with time that'll come. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org