Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Doug Goldstein <cardoe@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 15:02:46
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy by Richard Yao
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@×××××××××××××.edu> 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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] preserve_old_lib and I'm even more lazy Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>