On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 22:44 -0500, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Richard Yao <r...@cs.stonybrook.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. > > > > I've been using btrfs exclusively for about 6 months, and I don't > *think* I've lost anything... :) >
I did ... tried it out and found it "tougher" than reiserfs to break which is saying something considering how flaky extended 2/3 proved for the same task. Problem was, once it broke you couldnt fix it :( Also there are some things that dont work, one of which was a few packages would always fail to emerge when using btrfs for temp storage (I think one was libreoffice) So I deleted the btrfs partitions and put reiserfs back ... BillK
