Ubuntu always likes to be "on the edge" even if btrfs is far from being 'stable' I would not want to run a release that does this. Servers need stability and reliability. Btrfs is far from this.
Well, it seems to me that this is a well-known and very popular „circle in proving“: A: XYZ is far from stability and reliability. B: Are you sure? Have you had any serious issues with XYZ? Are there any failure reports and statistics? What are you comparing XYZ with? A: How can I be sure? I cannot give XYZ a try, because it is so far from stability and reliability... I run ArchLinux with Btrfs and OpenSolaris with ZFS. I haven't had a serious issue with any of them so far. (Well, in fact I had one issue with OpenSolaris in QEMU, but that's a well-known story, probably not related to ZFS: http://www.neuhalfen.name/2009/08/05/OpenSolaris_KVM_and_large_IDE_drives/.) As far as Btrfs is concerned, I am perfectly satisfied with it, as far as performance and features are concerned. On the other hand, Btrfs still has quite a lot of issues that need to be dealt with. For example, 1) Btrfs does not have mature and user-friendly command-line tools. AFAIK, you can only list your snapshots and subvolumes by grep'ing the tree dump. ;-) 2) there are still bugs that *must* be fixed before Btrfs can be seriously considered: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-bt...@vger.kernel.org/msg05130.html Undoubtedly, ZFS is currently much more mature and usable than Btrfs. However, Btrfs can evolve very quickly, considering the huge community around Linux. For example, EXT4 was first released in late 2006 and I first deployed it (with a stable on-disk format) in early 2009. Andrej
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
