From: "Avi Miller" <[email protected]>

>> On 30 Oct 2014, at 6:33 pm, Andrew McGlashan
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Avi,
>>
>> On 30/10/2014 12:33 PM, Avi Miller wrote:
>>> FYI, while it's not the default filesystem, you can do the same on
>>> Oracle Linux 6 and 7 when using btrfs as the root filesystem and
>>> installing yum-plugin-fs-snapshot. btrfs is available in the default
>>> Oracle Linux 7 installer as a filesystem option and if you want to
>>> install OL6 with a btrfs root, use the UEK-based boot ISO and a network
>>> install source.
>>
>> I believe the point was that it was "stable" subject to some serious
>> omissions for things you would like to do .... particularly with
>> "receive" being "totally disallowed" ...
>
> Yeah, not sure why SUSE chose to disallow those features. Most of those
> (with the exception of the truly in-development stuff like RAID5/6) are
> allowed and supported on Oracle Linux. We believe btrfs to be stable even
> with those features active.

The article also mentions some speed issues especially in relation to
databases.

I would be interested to know what Oracle says to databases on ZFS on
Solaris - and Btrfs on Linux systems (the later not supported by Oracle
yet, I believe, the first I am not sure about)

I am using ZFS, and compare Btrfs to it (e.g. to use similar technologies
on Linux machines). At the moment I stick with FreeBSD where I can (and
can choose) because overall it makes some work easier for me while doing
the same job in many cases.

BTW: Oracle VM (A Xen based virtualization host) surprised me recently.

The standard installation configured plain ext(ext3, I think but not sure)
filesystems on a standalone server and later warned me about using it as
the storage space for the VM disks (unfortunately I forgot exactly what it
was, it was about "missing features" on it - and it was not the obvious
about local storage which is not shared).

(I have replaced it by something more bizarre so I cannot confirm details
anymore, sorry)

Sometimes I just write to share information;-) It was not meant to be a
particular endorsement or the opposite.

My gut feeling: Use Btrfs for "bread and butter" work and not if you need
101% reliability. With backups and mirrors and failovers (which may be in
place anyway) you may be fine.

It would work in my work environment, I reckon.

I just do not get my head around why a subvolumes is called subvolume if
it is (according to the FAQ) comparable to a file system - you just can
have many of them in a pool.

So please call it a "filesystem". It is not a volume at all. The pool is!

But that may be too late to change. It is just a bit like calling a tube a
wheel - but only on my bicycle. My wheel got a puncture. Can you replace
it?

So for "my bicycle" you have to relearn terminology - or I get a new wheel
instead a new tube because you "misunderstood".

Regards
Peter

_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to