On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 11:12:46AM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > This is a pity---BTRFS features looked attractive: Regardless of the attractiveness of btr's feature sets, the RH annoucnement is an indication that they don't consider it supportable for the kinds of users that fork over money for RHEL. And FWIW, I intend to agree. For all of btrfs's promise, in my personal experience it fails the most basic requirement of a filesystem -- to not eat data. *Every* time I've experimented with btrfs, it's ended with massive filesystem corruption. No unclean shutdowns or other hardware failures, and I was also just sticking to basic "give me a simple filesystem" feature set. - Solomon -- Solomon Peachy pizza at shaftnet dot org Delray Beach, FL ^^ (email/xmpp) ^^ Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
