3 ms·
> What are some of the potential pitfalls? RAID-5/6: * https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-man5.html#raid56-status-and-recommended-practices https://
by throw0101c 3y ago
> What are some of the potential pitfalls?
RAID-5/6:
* https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-man5.html#raid56-status-and-recommended-practices https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-man5.html#raid5...
- viraptor 3y agoWouldn't describe that as a pitfall. As far as I can tell, every place in the docs/help which talks about those raid modes tell you they're experimental and shouldn't be used. At that point it's "you've done a stupid thing and discovered the consequences you were told about".
- throw0101c 3y agoIt's a feature that other file systems have: why should I choose Btrfs when (e.g.) ZFS can do everything it can and more on top of that? I remember when Btrfs was announced in 2007 as I was already running Solaris 10 with ZFS in production (and ZFS had non-"experimental" RAID-5-like RAID-Z from day one). Here we are 15+ years later and Btrfs still doesn't have it?
- pantalaimon 3y agoThe nice thing about btrfs is that you can add/remove drives at will. That allows for easy expansion of an existing pool.
- viraptor 3y agoI'm just saying it's not a pitfall, because it's clearly documented up front and warned about. That's orthogonal to whether you should choose this filesystem and why a feature is implemented or not.
- chasil 3y agoThe one thing that ZFS cannot do is defragment a pool. There are abuse patterns that are toxic for ZFS pools (and all other filesystems). Btrfs appears to be able to repair this damage. https://tim.cexx.org/?p=1236 https://tim.cexx.org/?p=1236 https://www.usenix.org/system/files/login/articles/login_summer17_02_conway.pdf https://www.usenix.org/system/files/login/articles/login_sum...
- pantalaimon 3y agoeh 10 years ago RAID56 was already declared 'pretty much ready', that hint was added later when major data loss bugs were discovered.