| |||||||||||||
Whither btrfsck?Whither btrfsck?Posted Oct 11, 2011 19:29 UTC (Tue) by masoncl (subscriber, #47138)In reply to: Whither btrfsck? by fuhchee Parent article: Whither btrfsck?
This is true, Oracle is greatly expanding it's use of btrfs in QA and will soon add it as a fully supported option. We will definitely have a working btrfsck before we recommend btrfs use in production.
Btrfs still won't be a good choice for database use, but thankfully the database has a few other ways to get rows and columns down to the storage.
It's worth pointing out that I have a number of slides featuring btrfsck for my linuxcon europe presentation and that Josef Bacik moved forward with a recovery tool that can copy data out of a damaged filesystem.
We're making progress, I'm just slower than I wanted to be.
(Log in to post comments)
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 12, 2011 19:44 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
We know, and you're not billing us for the time, and that's fine.
The question, Chris, isn't "should btrfs be in production use by now", or even "should btrfs be in production use while it doesn't have a working fsck in the wild".
It's "should people too stupid to breathe be protected from themselves by delaying the release of a tool that might make a bad situation worse"?
While I don't think Libertarianism is a workable political theory on the national scale, growing up on Heinlein has made me lean towards it as a personal philosophy, and I'm inclined towards the arguments made above: in short, that with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.
And that anyone dumb enough to trust a development-release filesystem to unbacked up real data of any sort deserves exactly what they get.
The real question is: what percentage of such users will *really* blame the developer -- especially if they had to, for example, go out and get the FS code, instead of just choosing it off an installer screen?
I suspect there are people who think it's higher than I do, but I don't have data.
In any event, we look forward to your patch. :-)
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 12, 2011 23:37 UTC (Wed) by dlang (✭ supporter ✭, #313) [Link]
where things get ugly is when distros jump in and make development/experimental releases/features standard.
just look at the horrible reputation that KDE4 got from distros including it too early as an example.
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 12, 2011 23:39 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
An excellent example, cause SUSE 11 did that to me, and I won't touch KDE4 now with an 39-1/2 foot pole.
Perhaps it's actually usable now, but it certainly wasn't, then...
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 13, 2011 6:48 UTC (Thu) by niner (subscriber, #26151) [Link]
It is. The desktop and most applications are in my experience more stable and powerful than 3.5.x was. Only kontact is still having problems (running kmail 2 with akonadi), but they always had. It's just different problems now and hopefully in the new codebase they are actually gonna be fixed.
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 13, 2011 9:09 UTC (Thu) by malor (subscriber, #2973) [Link] Well, but to be fair, they released it as a .0 version, which has a very specific meaning in the computer world (this is ready for you to use now!), and they did it explicitly to fool people into testing it... there are posts to that effect, that they knew putting a .0 on it would get more testers involved. Then they put not ready for production use down in the mass of announcement text. When people complained that the code was pretty crap, they shrugged and pointed at their escape clause.They broke the implied promise of end-user readiness, so I'd say the KDE team fully earned their loss of reputation. All they had to do was release it as 4.0 Alpha, and they'd have been mostly okay. Everyone knows code takes time to stabilize. Likewise, I think if btrfsk is released as 0.1 alpha, and it warns you that it sucks when you run it, then even if it does eat some babies, it won't be any big deal. And it MIGHT develop faster, although as corbet says, there may not yet be enough expertise in btrfs for anyone but Chris to be very useful working on it.
Whither btrfsck? Posted Oct 13, 2011 10:14 UTC (Thu) by sorpigal (subscriber, #36106) [Link] The primary benefit at this point of releasing the code seems to be "building trust" and not "speeding development." Maybe it gets debugged and improved faster, maybe not, but at least accusations of chicanery can be eliminated.
|
|||||||||||||