I'm one of those that used to have problems with btrfs on top of bcache. After some corruptions, I gave up this setup.
Recently (from February, I think) I gave it another shot, and I have had no problems since. I use bcache in writeback mode, with very good performance. I'm feeling btrfs very stable in this setup. Best Regards, Fabio Pfeifer 2015-04-20 11:49 GMT-03:00 Marc MERLIN <m...@merlins.org>: > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:27:05AM +0000, Hugo Mills wrote: >> See the first issue here: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas > > Hi Hugo, looking at the page again, I see > "bcache + btrfs does not seem to be stable yet" > linking to a thread more than 2 years old and btrfs kernels that > wouldn't be stable without bcache anyway. > > I've seen others mention they switched to bcache recently and not seen > new "it's broken" reports. > > So, is it ok > 1) to assume bcache and btrfs play ok together now? > 2) remove the warning from that gotchas page? > > Thanks, > Marc > -- > "A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in" - A.S.R. > Microsoft is to operating systems .... > .... what McDonalds is to gourmet > cooking > Home page: http://marc.merlins.org/ | PGP > 1024R/763BE901 > -- > 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 -- 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
