On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 09:27 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 9:18 AM, John Reiser <jreiser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 02/23/2011 05:07 AM, drago01 wrote: > >> Defaults should be chooses on the metric what provides the best > >> experience for the users not based on "what we have been doing in the > >> past" (i.e stagnation). > > > > *One* data corruption constitutes EPIC FAIL. Btrfs is too young, > > and will be for yet a while longer. > > > > Well if data corruption is the test then we shouldn't be using Ext4 > either, there was one fixed as recently as the beginning of this > month. File systems are software like anything else, there will be > bugs. Off the top of my head I can think of 3 data corrupters we've > had in 4 years of working on BTRFS, and they've all been hard to hit > and have not to my knowledge been seen by users, only us developers in > testing. BTRFS is young, but we have to start somewhere. Thanks, >From a user's perspective, I've been using btrfs for about 1.5 years on multiple computers and I've been very happy (particularly on my netbook where the transparent compression increases the disk writes considerably). I had one small problem where btrfs wouldn't mount, but by booting off of a newer kernel I had no problems. Thanks for your hard work on btrfs everyone! Nathaniel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
