>> For btrfs bugs are still fixed on a daily basis, and some reports of >> people with corrupted and unrecoverable filesystems. > > I don't know that there's been any actual unrecoverable filesystems > recently; unmountable is by far the more common issue, and given that > most sane people aren't putting their only copy of important > information on btrfs filesystems, their preference tends to be towards > wiping and starting over rather than spending a week to recover the > information by hand (the recovery tools that exist are the results of > the few who chose the other option). > > I think "... people with corrupted and not easily recoverable" would > be a better summary.
Yes, you are right, in most cases most/all of the data is recoverable. There was this case: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/14755 But that one might be recoverable as well. I'm sure btrfs will become the main linux filesystem of the future, it's just not there yet. The mythical btrfsck might change this. But neither btrfs or zfs on linux should currently be used for important production systems. Niels -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
