On 2024-12-04 03.15, Samuel Sieb wrote:
On 12/3/24 7:01 PM, Robin Laing wrote:
On 2024-12-03 00.23, Samuel Sieb wrote:
Use btrfs next time (it's the default now).
I had so many issues with btrfs in the past that I am going to wait
until I read that the tools are as good as ext4. After multiple re-
installs due to corrupted file systems and no tools to fix it.
I still read warnings about btrfs so I will avoid it.
Where are you seeing warnings about it? The only thing I've heard
recently is maybe about the RAID mode. I'm using it normally everywhere
now with no issues. The only problem system I had turned out to have
bad RAM. The workstation install uses btrfs by default, so a lot of
people are using it now. It helps avoid the situation you ran into with
space allocation.
I had tried BTFS a few years ago. File warnings and tried to repair
file system and ended up with messages from board to just reinstall the
OS. Files were listed with just a bunch of question marks. None of the
BTFS tools would touch them or change things. Since these were system
files, they were affecting system operations.
I have avoided it since as I didn't need the headaches in a day to day
operation. Maybe on something that I could dump for a few days, okay.
I have looked at the tools and see that if you set a cron job for
"scrub" that will minimize issues. Everything I read, "scrub" should be
run at least monthly if not weekly or more often. Also issues with how
free disk space is reported, even yesterday I current reports on freespace.
I would love to use a fault repairing file system for archives and
removable drives. This was why I tried BTFS in if the first place.
As it has been years. Just as being forced onto Wayland with KDE when
there are many reports of issues. I don't like headaches when I need to
use my computer.
Even from reports of this year, it is stated that if you use BTFS, you
need to be proactive on management, hence the comment about scrub. A
statement that from what I have read, should be a script in crontab on
install of btfs. Also, defrag on a regular basis with filefrag.
Next backup drive, I may give BTFS a try due to its design for file
safety which is important to file backups.
In my searching for this thread, I see that in the last few years, BTFS
has improved in relation to EXT4 (my preferred FS) for non-critical
workloads.
Things change and I am willing to try. One small step at a time. EXT4
is still classified as the most stable filesystem for Linux. Speed is
an issue for my file servers. File reliability for backup. And BTFS
may be the file system for backups and slow day to day usage.
I will give it a try again, probably in the very near future.
As I keep OS and data on separate drives(or even volumes), it will be
something for the future to consider.
My needs, my choice.
Robin.
--
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
