Re: [BackupPC-users] considerations on i-nodes

[Bzzzz]

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018 16:55:59 + (UTC)
Michael Stowe  wrote:

> While there's nothing inherently wrong with selecting an older 
> filesystem, ext4's design decision of backward compatibility has 
> essentially set some of its limitations in stone.  (Your article below 
> elaborates on this point; it's not a next generation filesystem, it's 
> just something that works.)

IIRC, EXT4 was launched almost only to counter ReiserFS that was raising
hard at this time and had the favour of people, opposing to what kernel
people were thinking was the best for others (as you see, development
democrature isn't really new and take it's roots at the source;)

Jean-Yves

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Re: [BackupPC-users] considerations on i-nodes

[Michael Stowe]

On 2018-04-19 06:31, G.W. Haywood via BackupPC-users wrote:

Hi there,

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018, Michael Stowe wrote:


... Those who do reach back a decade or more to select a filesystem,


That's like saying the Linux kernel is a hangover from the end of the
20th century.  It's misleading, and more than a bit unfair especially
considering the numbers of posts to the ext4 mailing list:

https://u2182357.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/click?upn=rBK8reUlX8Sxr7Iz1fV-2F7RuEFgozAWvnlNmELy4oKuiA3Uh2zVaVksANvOXpuehpkneX0E-2FfKBOjzEo25YDMGw-3D-3D_OypFYCWzG5ApGW-2FFpGTxc4RCS9eud0Dl1htN5rYoUZ8To4zeNUFBkAGI3hzer91CasKnxVRTUBW0lnnPUiBFDbnzrPzFGfYmk0Iwn1duJneKWemz0bfm83-2Fl8P8pIa0YGeA8QAnhxRLigz6DuEWH0WyS6jHH3rHg5QJhsnUJVs1DRyBbhwrZ-2FLQ9SNo7ZD6ANz0-2BbsyrFGuo-2FUHmLHgg9NSil8n8wpRXy0GiOoHi4bIQ3Lhx4MOCnpVaarfVSQNm


While there's nothing inherently wrong with selecting an older 
filesystem, ext4's design decision of backward compatibility has 
essentially set some of its limitations in stone.  (Your article below 
elaborates on this point; it's not a next generation filesystem, it's 
just something that works.)



I generally expect to have good reason ...


Like, er, it works, it's currently under active development, and it's
supported by every Linux distribution you're likely to meet? :)

Yes, even the developers will agree that it's a stop-gap measure.

But it's a big gap, and the rest of them haven't quite plugged it yet:

https://u2182357.ct.sendgrid.net/wf/click?upn=rBK8reUlX8Sxr7Iz1fV-2F7UY4nHmLotbnt-2B5EKj0ng5UcSekH-2BHZpU1dS98SsvUShSx4-2BUbCV8Vb8B6dBgin8IA-3D-3D_OypFYCWzG5ApGW-2FFpGTxc4RCS9eud0Dl1htN5rYoUZ8To4zeNUFBkAGI3hzer91CasKnxVRTUBW0lnnPUiBFDZN1h9k4ItyZ8gGNYlU-2B0dRBvelHnc-2BeUkG1G6dU7PDf-2FElfMd2R-2FZAdFHXec7SgsItHvPTxrnMLjr3JiKAKszqOf3OTw4zwTUilcgLC8kMmaSdKlN7-2BtdgplPjuEfgnssjx7gIlgRgctYxuXZesbWmzum-2FxNj24SzlNV-2FxfC2p7


I don't think we're disagreeing, but I note that I'm specifically not 
talking about what filesystem one might select for a disposable Linux 
system and whatever came with the distro, but presumably a backup system 
from which one wants to store and recover files, into which one 
presumably would wish to select something most appropriate to the task, 
and "I want to futz around with inode allocations" is rarely at the top 
of people's to do lists.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Re: [BackupPC-users] considerations on i-nodes

[Michael Stowe]

On 2018-04-19 07:37, Gerald Brandt wrote:

I've had data loss on XFS, so I'm very wary of it. It used to be my go
to filesystem.

Lately, I've been looking at bcachefs2. Anyone experience using it?

Gerald


I've also had data loss on XFS, for which I have no satisfactory 
explanation, but I'm equally wary.  Somewhere around here there's a 
limited comparison I did where I recommend btrfs and JFS.  bcachefs 
seems intriguing, but I haven't used it in anger and I haven't seen 
anything practical to distinguish it from btrfs, but I haven't dived 
into it in much depth, either.
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/

Re: [BackupPC-users] considerations on i-nodes

[G.W. Haywood via BackupPC-users]

Hi there,

On Thu, 19 Apr 2018, Michael Stowe wrote:


... Those who do reach back a decade or more to select a filesystem,


That's like saying the Linux kernel is a hangover from the end of the
20th century.  It's misleading, and more than a bit unfair especially
considering the numbers of posts to the ext4 mailing list:

https://marc.info/?l=linux-ext4=1=201804=2


I generally expect to have good reason ...


Like, er, it works, it's currently under active development, and it's
supported by every Linux distribution you're likely to meet? :)

Yes, even the developers will agree that it's a stop-gap measure.

But it's a big gap, and the rest of them haven't quite plugged it yet:

https://opensource.com/article/18/4/ext4-filesystem

--

73,
Ged.

--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
___
BackupPC-users mailing list
BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net
List:https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users
Wiki:http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net
Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/