Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: Hey all, Over the last few months (since Fedora 22 beta's release), I've been using Btrfs as my daily driver filesystem across a multitude of machines. After Fedora 22 released, I tried it with RAID 5 and RAID 6 enabled on a few machines with fantastic success (there aren't even any scary warnings about being experimental anymore!). Admittedly, my tests have been specific to my needs (media center storage, workstations, laptops with SSDs, etc.), but it appears to work really well now. Also, with kernel 4.1 imported into rawhide, we've now got performance improvements for large (20TB) filesystems (though it's been plenty fast for my 48TB array). As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. The question now is: as a distribution, where are we on this? The tools seem to work, the filesystem appears stable, and I've not been able to cause the filesystem to corrupt itself with any kind of user error or cause it to keel over. So, what's left? Sorry I completely missed this conversation. I'm not interested in pushing btrfs into Fedora now. There is nobody to support it if things go wrong. If you want to use btrfs you can, or you can use Suse. We're finding and fixing things in our internal testing at Facebook, and the power fail testing stuff I added early this year has given me a lot of confidence in our ability to not lose all of your data due to some weird bug. In a few months we'll have switched over lots of our boxes onto btrfs so that will give us a pretty good way to keep track of stability in a production environment. After that I imagine it'll be good to go for Fedora, but that'll be somebody else's decision, I'm no longer super interested in driving anything in Fedora. Thanks, Josef -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 4:19 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Andre Robatino robat...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Neal Gompa ngompa13 at gmail.com writes: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. I asked about this recently on #fedora-devel (I was the one who asked originally on this list) and was told there are no plans to make it the default yet. It's amazing that it was originally planned to be the default on F16 (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs ). But I don't want to see Someone created a wiki page proposing that. It was never actually planned to be the default. It was a feature approved by FESCo to make it the default for Fedora 16 instead of ext4. http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-08/fesco.2011-06-08-17.30.log.html I stand corrected. That was during the timeframe where I had briefly left Fedora development so I clearly missed this. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 14:49 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198 Not that anyone should go try to make sense out of a three year old bug with over 100 comments... but the gist is nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter. That is not an accurate summary. For F20 it was rejected as a Beta blocker and accepted as a Final blocker. It was addressed by preventing the installer from allowing /boot to be on a btrfs subvolume. For F21 anaconda actually allowed /boot on btrfs subvol; this wasn't intentional but an oversight, but no-one proposed it as a blocker for any 21 milestone and it slipped through. For F22 we handled it in the same way as F20: it was accepted as a blocker and considered addressed by preventing the installer from allowing /boot on btrfs. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 18:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: Preventing the conditions that result in boot failure is not the same thing as fixing the underlying problem with /boot on Btrfs being unsupported by grubby. Indeed it isn't, but I never said it was. I said your characterization of how the release criteria have been applied was incorrect, and I stand by that. The phrase nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter is a characterization of QA's application of release criteria. It is a paraphrased, annoyed, editorialization of this statement: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198#c50 this needs to be fixed if we want to enable installing to such a configuration, but right now we don't. Which I questioned in the bug and didn't get a response to. I'm criticizing this slippery slope logical fallacy that punts a fatal grubby bug onto another team for a work around rather than an actual fix; and also the falsehood that we don't want to enable installing into a configuration that was approved by FESCO six releases ago. I don't recall that, do you have any references? It exists, but I can't find it at the moment. However, the alternative of the unwritten exception for Btrfs is we just wait for Btrfs by default before requiring things that should work to work, which is distinctly cart before the horse and risks regressions or even possibly reversion mid-cycle. This idea that the main hold up is Btrfs upstream and a Josef sign off is misleading. There are other things that need work. Fedora really doesn't have its own ducks in a row. There are still some ugly UI/UX problems in the installer, but the installer team has found more features to add to the world's most capable OS installer, so they don't have time this cycle for Btrfs related improvements. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: The phrase nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter is a characterization of QA's application of release criteria. is ^NOT a characterization (Even after proof reading it!) -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Michael Catanzaro mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote: We're unlikely to move forward with btrfs for Workstation until the kernel team changes its recommendation. There's work to be done that's not at all contingent on the kernel team changing its rec. Add Btrfs support to udisks (this was opened in 2010) https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26258 Wrong Disk size with btrfs https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708786 manages Btrfs multiple device volumes incorrectly, cannot umount (obviously the above bug is still valid) https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=87277 btrfs snapshot and subvolume support https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=710156 The first two act as regressions if Btrfs is made default fs. The third could corrupt the file system (it hasn't yet for me despite my cruelty, but no file system enjoys being yanked before unmounted). The fourth is more of a feature request. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Thu, 2015-06-25 at 18:06 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 14:49 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198 Not that anyone should go try to make sense out of a three year old bug with over 100 comments... but the gist is nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter. That is not an accurate summary. For F20 it was rejected as a Beta blocker and accepted as a Final blocker. It was addressed by preventing the installer from allowing /boot to be on a btrfs subvolume. Preventing the conditions that result in boot failure is not the same thing as fixing the underlying problem with /boot on Btrfs being unsupported by grubby. Indeed it isn't, but I never said it was. I said your characterization of how the release criteria have been applied was incorrect, and I stand by that. And since something like Fedora 18/19 we supposedly agreed Btrfs should have parity with other fs's with respect to release criteria, but plainly that's not the case. I don't recall that, do you have any references? If anything we may have said it should get more prominence *on the basis it would soon be the default FS*, but that basis clearly hasn't worked out in reality. (FWIW, I'd apply the same principles to a similar bug in any FS which is not the default for any of our release-blocking flavors.) -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Adam Williamson adamw...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 14:49 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198 Not that anyone should go try to make sense out of a three year old bug with over 100 comments... but the gist is nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter. That is not an accurate summary. For F20 it was rejected as a Beta blocker and accepted as a Final blocker. It was addressed by preventing the installer from allowing /boot to be on a btrfs subvolume. Preventing the conditions that result in boot failure is not the same thing as fixing the underlying problem with /boot on Btrfs being unsupported by grubby. Such a work around would never be considered acceptable for ext3, ext4 or XFS /boot volumes. We'd block on that. And since something like Fedora 18/19 we supposedly agreed Btrfs should have parity with other fs's with respect to release criteria, but plainly that's not the case. What really irritates me about this bug more than any in recent memory is we had a contributor working to patch grubby to fix this problem. The patches were tested by you and by me and they worked. Yet for f'n 9 months pjones didn't have the courtesy to bring his (eventual) criticisms to gczarcinski. Not until at least half a dozen people had to go through this goddamn bug, yet again, for Fedora 22 blocker review, make it a blocker, do we get an offline relay from pjones that the patches were deficient and he wanted to do it differently but with no further elaboration on what that should look like in case someone wants to do that work. And now gczarcinsk doesn't respond to any emails to any of his email addresses: so he's either died in the long interim it took to lead him on only to tell him to go pound salt months later, or he's sufficiently pissed off with the Fedora process that he's over it. So you're right, the summary was not completely accurate. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On 24 June 2015 at 04:28, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky zn...@znmeb.net wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? Bingo! We need a. Pass/fail performance criteria b. Pass/fail data loss criteria c. Pass/fail security criteria And advice for end users on btrfs management. People trying it out already are going to be more enthusiastic about understanding filesystems than the typical user. Also considering whether anything will be broken by the change, for example, df reporting inaccurate numbers may have knock on effects. -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 June 2015 at 18:40, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: That is precisely why I'm asking on this list. I don't know who those people are, and this is really the best place I know of to start contact and those discussions. My apologies.. my tone was not helpful. You are correct that asking here is where to start. I think the groups who would be able to help answer would be 1. Kernel team 2. QA team 3. Anaconda team 4. Workstation/Server/Cloud or just one if it were to be only on one product. I suspect that engaging every one of those would probably be the right way to go, since we need to figure out suitability across the board as the default. Every group would have different criteria, which is why we have differing filesystem defaults across the board now. On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:28 PM, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky zn...@znmeb.net wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? Bingo! We need a. Pass/fail performance criteria b. Pass/fail data loss criteria c. Pass/fail security criteria and code to drive them all. My area of expertise is strictly performance. I'd be happy to contribute tests and analysis, although I suspect Phoronix may have everything needed. Let's say a three-way bakeoff - btrfs, ext4 and xfs (since IIRC xfs is a default in some RHEL configurations). Let me know if you want me to resurrect any of my 2009 stuff on disk performance. Fedora does have Phoronix's test suite in our repositories, so that can be used for performance tests, but additional specific tests may be of value too. I'm not sure how to test for security. As far as I know, encryption is usually handled by other tools underneath the filesystem (LUKS/dm-crypt) or above it (ecryptfs). A design for data integrity tests would probably be a good idea. A coworker of mine at my day job and I did some ad-hoc tests with fio in our spare time to test Btrfs' capabilities on RAID 56 with a multi-disk Btrfs filesystem and yanked disks, faking damage and replacement to see how the system recovered using the functions available. From our ad-hoc tests, it looked pretty damn good. I could talk to him and see if we could formalize it a bit and bring it to Fedora for use in data integrity tests. But it may not be enough, so perhaps other folks have some ideas here on data integrity tests? On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:42 AM, Ian Malone ibmal...@gmail.com wrote: On 24 June 2015 at 04:28, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky zn...@znmeb.net wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? Bingo! We need a. Pass/fail performance criteria b. Pass/fail data loss criteria c. Pass/fail security criteria And advice for end users on btrfs management. People trying it out already are going to be more enthusiastic about understanding filesystems than the typical user. Also considering whether anything will be broken by the change, for example, df reporting inaccurate numbers may have knock on effects. I would be happy to help with that. In fact, I actually gave a talk on Btrfs and using it http://files.meetup.com/13432052/mtg2015-06-03-intro-to-btrfs.pdf at my local Linux Users' Group in Norwalk, CT and helped other people there to start using it. Developing a plan and documentation on how to use Btrfs effectively is probably a good idea. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote: Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=864198 Not that anyone should go try to make sense out of a three year old bug with over 100 comments... but the gist is nah, we don't want to fix it now, therefore the release criteria don't matter. --- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. The multiple device stuff is no where near as feature complete in failure contexts as mdadm or even lvm raid. There's no notification of device failures that appear in GNOME, for example, which is the case for mdadm managed devices. There's been push back on the btrfs@ list about the wholesale dropping of experimental warnings in particular with multiple device cases. So just because there's no scary warning doesn't mean we know where all the bodies are buried. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? Well the plan right now is deference to Josef Bacik. When he says it's ready then I think the change can happen. But there are other factors than this, and I think it's appropriate to have more clear criteria than just what Josef says, that incorporates other concerns. For example: Grubby doesn't grok Btrfs subvolumes, so /boot can't be a Btrfs subvolume. So right now the installer proscribes it and uses ext4 for /boot similar to encrypted root and LVM layouts. However, if grubby couldn't boot from ext4 or XFS for some reason, it would be considered a release blocking bug. Yet this bug [1] is routinely voted as being release blocking, but then the grubby maintainer successfully argues to make it not release blocking because after all Btrfs is not the default file system so who cares that it doesn't work (basically). So some features/bugs simply aren't going to get fixed until there's the proper incentive, obviously. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 June 2015 at 18:40, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: That is precisely why I'm asking on this list. I don't know who those people are, and this is really the best place I know of to start contact and those discussions. My apologies.. my tone was not helpful. You are correct that asking here is where to start. I think the groups who would be able to help answer would be 1. Kernel team The Fedora kernel team is fairly tired of having this same conversation every release[1]. Progress is certainly being made upstream and it is encouraging to see issues get fixed. However, most of the same points we brought up last time this was discussed still exist. So in the interest of being clear, our official position is that we would not recommend btrfs as the default filesystem in any Fedora Edition. Here are a few reasons why. 1) The upstream maintainers (primarily Josef) have repeatedly said [2][3] btrfs is not ready to be default and that they would advocate for a change when btrfs is ready. That has not happened. 2) The Fedora kernel team does not have extensive knowledge or expertise available to debug btrfs issues. While this is generally true for a lot of the kernel subsystems, we do have expertise available to us for ext4 and XFS. We tend to value user data very highly, and having additional filesystem developers readily available to help fix issues found in Fedora is extremely important to us. 3) The level of effort around btrfs in Fedora outside of our team is fairly limited. We have a few people plugging away at testing and reporting upstream, which is excellent to see and should be encourage. Some may suggest this is a chicken and egg situation, but btrfs has been available as a general filesystem choice on install since F16. None of the features people seem to want from btrfs have been further integrated into the distro at all. Things like backup/restore via snapshot, update/rollback via snapshot, etc have no distro level integration at all. The btrfs-progs and Snapper packages are in the repository, but that is about it. 4) As mentioned before, the filesystem is general available for those that wish to use it. It is an installation choice in the installer. Considering some of the above points, it is not immediately clear why btrfs would need to be the default at all. Assuming the above 3 points improve, we don't foresee Server switching away from XFS anytime soon. Cloud/Atomic get no major benefits from using it (CoreOS recently moved away from btrfs). Workstation is the most likely target but even there it is unclear how much of a benefit it would bring. With all that being said, the choice of filesystem is ultimately up to the Working Groups and end users. Our input is just one piece of the puzzle. We likely don't have much else to say on this topic, but please keep the above points in mind in your further discussions. josh (for the Fedora kernel team) [1]https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2014-March/009411.html [2]https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-February/196006.html (F21) [3]https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-October/203058.html (F22) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, 2015-06-23 at 19:07 -0600, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: My apologies.. my tone was not helpful. You are correct that asking here is where to start. I think the groups who would be able to help answer would be 1. Kernel team 2. QA team 3. Anaconda team 4. Workstation/Server/Cloud or just one if it were to be only on one product. We're unlikely to move forward with btrfs for Workstation until the kernel team changes its recommendation. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Andre Robatino robat...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Neal Gompa ngompa13 at gmail.com writes: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. I asked about this recently on #fedora-devel (I was the one who asked originally on this list) and was told there are no plans to make it the default yet. It's amazing that it was originally planned to be the default on F16 (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs ). But I don't want to see Someone created a wiki page proposing that. It was never actually planned to be the default. It was a feature approved by FESCo to make it the default for Fedora 16 instead of ext4. http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-08/fesco.2011-06-08-17.30.log.html But this came with some criteria to be met before freeze, namely btrfsck, which were not met and two months later Josef said it would not be the default. Since he subsequently left Red Hat, only Eric Sandeen has much Btrfs knowledge, but he works mainly on the RHEL kernel and doesn't have time to help maintain Btrfs stuff for the very new kernels Fedora uses beyond what upstream does. And for that matter, no one upstream intends for serious regressions to happen in Btrfs, yet they can and do happen. So the catch-22 with Fedora kernels being so new, is anyone using Btrfs is going to be among the first users to experience bug fixes, feature enhancements as well as regressions. I don't know that having an experienced Btrfs kernel developer on the Fedora kernel team would matter that much in preventing regressions from landing as Fedora stable kernels. Rather, it'd probably take an increase in time to stable or increase in karma value to delay the unknown, until better known. openSUSE uses Btrfs by default (except for /home) but they'd also using much older kernels with cherry picked backported bug fixes. Even if Fedora had a Btrfs dev I don't foresee Fedora running 3-4 major versions of the kernel behind, just to make Btrfs the default. -- Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
Hey all, Over the last few months (since Fedora 22 beta's release), I've been using Btrfs as my daily driver filesystem across a multitude of machines. After Fedora 22 released, I tried it with RAID 5 and RAID 6 enabled on a few machines with fantastic success (there aren't even any scary warnings about being experimental anymore!). Admittedly, my tests have been specific to my needs (media center storage, workstations, laptops with SSDs, etc.), but it appears to work really well now. Also, with kernel 4.1 imported into rawhide, we've now got performance improvements for large (20TB) filesystems (though it's been plenty fast for my 48TB array). As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-October/203058.html. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. The question now is: as a distribution, where are we on this? The tools seem to work, the filesystem appears stable, and I've not been able to cause the filesystem to corrupt itself with any kind of user error or cause it to keel over. So, what's left? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
Neal Gompa ngompa13 at gmail.com writes: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. I asked about this recently on #fedora-devel (I was the one who asked originally on this list) and was told there are no plans to make it the default yet. It's amazing that it was originally planned to be the default on F16 (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs ). But I don't want to see data loss, and not knowing much about filesystems, am sticking to the default. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Andre Robatino robat...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Neal Gompa ngompa13 at gmail.com writes: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23. At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Perhaps other guys with more experience on this stuff could chime in with feedback/information/etc, but it feels like we should start the process to get everything ready for Btrfs being default in Fedora 23. I asked about this recently on #fedora-devel (I was the one who asked originally on this list) and was told there are no plans to make it the default yet. It's amazing that it was originally planned to be the default on F16 (see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Btrfs ). But I don't want to see Someone created a wiki page proposing that. It was never actually planned to be the default. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-October/203058.html . At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Well actually he said his plan was to push for F23. I've been using btrfs raid 6 for several years now and have been lucky I haven't encountered any issues - but if you subscribe to the mailing list you'll see others haven't been quite as lucky. I'm sure he'll propose it once he believes it is ready. When proposing a default change it is prudent to be cautious. In the meantime it's there to use for early adopters; and the more people who test the faster issues will be identified and corrected. Just be sure you've taken the proper precautions ;-) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-October/203058.html . At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Well actually he said his plan was to push for F23. I've been using btrfs raid 6 for several years now and have been lucky I haven't encountered any issues - but if you subscribe to the mailing list you'll see others haven't been quite as lucky. I'm sure he'll propose it once he believes it is ready. When proposing a default change it is prudent to be cautious. In the meantime it's there to use for early adopters; and the more people who test the faster issues will be identified and corrected. Just be sure you've taken the proper precautions ;-) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On 23 June 2015 at 14:15, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 . At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Well actually he said his plan was to push for F23. I've been using btrfs raid 6 for several years now and have been lucky I haven't encountered any issues - but if you subscribe to the mailing list you'll see others haven't been quite as lucky. I'm sure he'll propose it once he believes it is ready. When proposing a default change it is prudent to be cautious. In the meantime it's there to use for early adopters; and the more people who test the faster issues will be identified and corrected. Just be sure you've taken the proper precautions ;-) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? So if there are problems who is going to deal with the users, diagnose the issues and fix them? Those are going to be the people who will need to push for this feature if they think it is ready or not. I would start by finding out who they are, talking with them and then looking at what time frame they think the feature would be ready. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Btrfs as default filesystem for Fedora 23?
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Stephen John Smoogen smo...@gmail.com wrote: On 23 June 2015 at 14:15, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Gerald B. Cox gb...@bzb.us wrote: On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Neal Gompa ngomp...@gmail.com wrote: As I recall, Josef Bacik mentioned that he'd be pushing for Btrfs becoming the default in Fedora 23 . At this point, I'm personally convinced that it is certainly ready and doable for F23. Well actually he said his plan was to push for F23. I've been using btrfs raid 6 for several years now and have been lucky I haven't encountered any issues - but if you subscribe to the mailing list you'll see others haven't been quite as lucky. I'm sure he'll propose it once he believes it is ready. When proposing a default change it is prudent to be cautious. In the meantime it's there to use for early adopters; and the more people who test the faster issues will be identified and corrected. Just be sure you've taken the proper precautions ;-) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Certainly, but with none of the features in Btrfs actually emitting scary experimental warnings anymore, and even all features working in btrfs RAID 5/6 now, I think we should really start pushing it to more people. Or at least develop some kind of test plan to prove the worthiness of using it as default. We must have something, ne? So if there are problems who is going to deal with the users, diagnose the issues and fix them? Those are going to be the people who will need to push for this feature if they think it is ready or not. I would start by finding out who they are, talking with them and then looking at what time frame they think the feature would be ready. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct That is precisely why I'm asking on this list. I don't know who those people are, and this is really the best place I know of to start contact and those discussions. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
