Our largest installation hasn't seen any problems with btrfs on 2.6.38.6, although it may not be as busy as the clusters you're running on. I would recommend trying to use a newish stable release though, since the major releases I think are still introducing new features into btrfs, and code churn always creates bugs. -Greg On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Christian Brunner <chb@xxxxxx> wrote: > We are having quite some problems with the underlying filesystem for > the cosd's and I would like to hear about other experiences. Here is > what we have gone through so far: > > btrfs with 2.6.38: > > - good performance > - frequently hitting of various BUG_ON conditions > > btrfs with 2.6.39: > > - big performance problems after a few days uptime > - occasionally hitting BUG_ON conditions > > btrfs with 3.0: > > - big performance problems after a few days uptime > - occasionally hitting a deadlock in the btrfs filesystem (cosd is in D-state) > > ext4 with a RHEL6.0 kernel (don't remember exactly): > > - almost immediate blowup of the kernel (OOPS) > > From what I read in Fyodors emails ext4 in 2.6.39 isn't much better. > > So, what filesystem would you recommend? > > Thanks, > Christian > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
