And wasn't there an issue with fsck?
Myself I have only 2 experiences:
- it was the default in the Meego systems I used. But for obvious reason that usage did not last long.
- when I once wanted a "portable" Ubuntu installed on a USB stick, I used btrfs because of the possibility to compress everything. Besides that it probably was only a 4GB stick, I thought the bigger the speed gap between CPU and "disk", the more beneficial compression should be for overall performance, because there are plenty of spare cycles. The overall result was catastrophic, because every bigger apt-get upgrade took really several hours. The reason was that apt seems to be really cautious about not ending up in an inconsistent state if aborted in the middle of an operation, so it does plenty of fsync (IIRC) calls. At least back then that was a known performance problem in btrfs. I shortly experimented with hooking eatmydata underneath apt, but for some reasons the project then faded out...
(I still wonder how Meego could live with that problem. Is it just the number of packages, which problably was only a fraction in a Meego tablet compared to a full Ubuntu desktop installation? Or is rpm less paranoid than apt about ending up with inconsistent results if something goes wrong?)
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds