Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists. c.f. bug 424647
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@...> wrote:
>> Am I the only paranoid person who moves them rather than unlinking
>> them? Oh, if only btrfs were stable...
>
> Is this a reference to snapshots? You can use ZFS for those. The
> kernel modules are only available in the form of 9999 ebuilds right
> now, but they your data should be safe unless you go out of your way
> to break things (e.g. putting the ZIL/SLOG on a tmpfs). Alternatively,
> there is XFS, which I believe also supports snapshots.
>
FWIW, I'll second the ZFS > btrfs suggestion. I understand people want
to go btrfs cause its the Linux way but in real world usage, its
performance is abysmal We've had over a dozen developers switch to
btrfs in my group on their various environments (OpenSUSE, Fedora, own
rolled distros) and they've all gone back to their previous filesystem
of choice.
Simplest test I can suggest to btrfs users to attempt is the following:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/btrfs/file bs=4k count=100 oflag=direct
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/ext4/file bs=4k count=100 oflag=direct
It will emulate the similar operation to an fdatasync().
--
Doug Goldstein
|
|
