3 ms·
Well, that was my primary point. BTRFS is not ready for these kind of big installations handled by ZFS or Lustre at this point. On the other hand, BTRFS’ singl
by bayindirh 3y ago
Well, that was my primary point. BTRFS is not ready for these kind of big installations handled by ZFS or Lustre at this point.
On the other hand, BTRFS’ single disk performance, esp, for small files is visibly lower than EXT4 and XFS, so why bother?
There are many solutions for EXT4 which allows versioning, and if I can reimage a node (or 200) in 5 minute flat, why should I bother with the overhead of BTRFS?
It’s not that I haven’t tried BTRFS. Its features are nice, but from my perspective, it’s not ready for prime time, yet. What bothers me is the mental gymnastics pretending that it’s mature at this point.
It’ll be good file system. An excellent one in fact, but it still needs to cook.