Testing The "Pretty Beefy" Btrfs Changes In Linux 3.2
Phoronix: Testing The "Pretty Beefy" Btrfs Changes In Linux 3.2
Among many other enhancements and alterations, the Linux 3.2 kernel, the Btrfs file-system has some "pretty beefy" changes. Btrfs in Linux 3.2 merges in some long-standing Btrfs branches with new capabilities.
I wish it was finally marked as "stable".
And: Is there any benchmark to test reliability of a FS?
Its quite sad to watch btrfs progressing.
It has been in development for a few years now, however still even lacks a consistency checker, shows often suboptimal performance in real-world use and tends to degrade over time.
I lost data two times, because a btrfs-partition couldn't be mounted from one day to another.
Guess it will take another 2-3 years until btrfs is ready to replace ext4.
Except that there is no point for Oracle in doing that. They are the main developers of both ZFS and BTRFS.
Originally Posted by crazycheese
The "let it be used for 5 years in the enterprise, watch news headlines" bench is a pretty good one. If you need faster results, start a long disk test and periodically yank out the power cord.
Originally Posted by Adarion
Hehe, you're probably right there. But pulling the power cord or sudden power loss most times resulted in drama here.
"Rome wasn't built in a day"
Seriously, I use XFS, XFS has been around for over 16 years now, they're still improving it and fixing bugs.
BtrFS has been around for all of like a few years now, it's still incredibly new, some things it does have never even been done before. Back off and quit complaining that it's "Not done yet" every few days. Please?
It'll be ready when it is ready, in the mean time be thankful that any Linux file system beats what Microsoft and Apple push.
That's something that's always interested me, you only see the Linux filesystems compared against themselves.
How do they stack up against NTFS?
With the NTFS module in the kernel, it would be possible to add comparative benchmarks to this wouldn't it?