4 ms·
Witnessing defects means that they exist; witnessing no defects does not mean they don't.
by yarg 3y ago
Witnessing defects means that they exist; witnessing no defects does not mean they don't.
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y agoIf that’s the case, prove the giant Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn’t exist.
- nailer 3y agoI think you’ve misread the parent comment. Witnessing no FSM does not mean there is no FSM.
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y agoAssuming FSM is referring to defects, witnessing no defects increases confidence that no defects exist in the observed state. Conversely, witnessing defects does not itself prove defects exist if the test cases were not scientific, it increases the confidence that defects exist but there exists some probability that an unrelated defect (bad ram, kernel error, hardware failure, solar flares) could have caused the issue. But there’s also a lot of evidence to suggest Brtfs has had a lot of defects resolved in recent years, so it’s also important to note that as time moves forward, the amount of existing and likely rate of introducing new defects is likely to decrease. I should add ive had minimal skin in this game until yesterday. I chose brtfs for two systems for snapshot support, but that’s in addition to regular backups on another host, because it’s silly to trust any single compute node regardless of file system.
- nailer 3y ago> Assuming FSM is referring to defects No. It is referring to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, but is an analogy for anything including defects. This is discussion about epistemology not filesystems.
- hsbauauvhabzb 3y agoReplace ‘defects’ with ‘miracles’ and/or ‘science’ depending on which makes more sense.
- nailer 3y agoI’m not sure how anyone can witness no science
- viraptor 3y agoYeah, an interesting scenario is that many people compare the btrfs behaviour to "never had issues with extfs". When in practice it's "extfs couldn't have told me about this issue even if it existed".