18 ms·
I'm having modest success using an eSATA enclosure on Windows with Storage Spaces. On the Linux side, BTRFS may be suitable but harder to manage (This is part
by mey 9y ago
I'm having modest success using an eSATA enclosure on Windows with Storage Spaces. On the Linux side, BTRFS may be suitable but harder to manage (This is part of what Synology/NetGear are providing management around.)
- paulie_a 9y agoIn my experience btrfs is not suitable for anything.
- jchw 9y agoUnfortunately, I've learned this the hard way. Twice. I'm sure it's more stable now than it was when I used it last, but it's frustrating when people say "no, this time it's really stable!" and then you lose data due to a bug. This same thing has never happened to me with ZFS on Linux, which is a shame because the licensing issues make it painful for me to use. I like up to date kernels. I feel like btrfs should be phased out. It was clearly developed in a fashion that did nothing to prevent preventable bugs. This may be the same frustration that's leading RedHat to work on their own competing filesystem...
- mey 9y agoAny suggestions for a dynamically grow-able/shrinkable system of mixed drives for linux? When I last looked (and why I went with Storage Spaces) was that ZFS requires pools to be fixed at initialization, and I wasn't sure what other OSS solutions were mature at the time.
- paulie_a 9y agoI have no suggestions honestly, I have looked into it pretty extensively and would like to go ZFS. But it will cost a decent amount for the setup I am looking for. It seems to be "all or nothing"