I think btrfs as default would be somewhere between very brave and negligent at this point until it has a good well tested fsck tool and some of the underlying other performance problems are sorted out nicely. If your desktop is a bit iffy it crashes maybe it annoys people, it's hard to use it's a bit of a niggle, and you can switch. If your fs crashes or you get a bad block, or you lose power at the wrong moment you have a problem if your fsck isn't rock solid (or plain doesn't exist). If your fs goes wrong you are in 'reinstall' territory, which is a whole different level of severity to 'my desktop sucks'. Worse than that fs bugs in development fs code can slowly and subtly corrupt your data without showing errors, so even your backups are corrupt in places. Trialing a new fs on end users without enormous testing and care is not smart. It needs huge planning, verification work, consistency checkers, fsck tools that *work* and are tested heavily. Plus in a funny way btrfs is now in part un-needed, With the move to SSD devices (which looks like it will speed up rapidly due to the catastrophic flooding) the seek and I/O rate problems mostly go away for existing fs types. Alan -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
