4 ms·
Yeah, I'd like to know more about this. Should I be using it instead of EXT4 on my old, boring desktop SSD?
by drivebyacct2 14y ago
Yeah, I'd like to know more about this. Should I be using it instead of EXT4 on my old, boring desktop SSD?
- simcop2387 14y agoAt the moment it's had some reports of syncing issues (e.g. not syncing when it should), and a few performance odditites. All that being said, I'm not sure i've seen reports of any corruption outright but it is fairly new compared to the ext family. I'd say stick with EXT4/3 if you're using the desktop ssd for anything serious, if not, go for it; it doesn't look like it'll kill your cat and/or wife.
- drivebyacct2 14y agoOh, I don't care if it eats my root install. I've got a "reinstall everything and reconfigure everything" script that gets me back to 99% after a new install. Plus, I keep my home partition on a "totally stable TM" RAID10 BTRFS array, so I don't mind a bit of risk.
- wazoox 14y agoIsn't "totally stable" and "btrfs" somewhat contradictory?
- specto 14y ago_So far_ my experience has been btrfs is stable, meaning I haven't had any data corruption and TRIM works great. That being said I have multiple backups and images of the system :)
- drivebyacct2 14y agoIt was tongue-in-cheek humor.
- Symmetry 14y agoWell, Phoronix has put out some benchmarks for it here: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux_f2fs_benchmarks&num=5 http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=linux... I'd generally say you shouldn't use a just-merged filesystem on anything really critical, though.