Post a Comment
Nope, still no working fsck, or really, any debugging/recovery tools.
Yep, Fedora is still going ahead despite the lack of an fsck tool.
There are lots of "in progress" features for btrfs; seems a little premature to make it the default. An option, sure, but certainly not the default.
They won't go on BTRFS if no btrfs.fsck is released.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689509
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689512
https://lwn.net/Articles/446984/
It's been available for testing on live systems in Fedora since at least F10, so yeah they can be reasonably sure that it won't blow up. Well as sure as any Fedora release that is, they do like to dance on the bleeding edge at times. I know I myself have been running it for a year or so now with no real hiccups I didn't cause for myself.
Not sure if the performance is up to par in all areas though. I recall benchmarks showing the FS being a bit on the sluggish side for database type stuff when compared to EXT4 and other common FS.
I have no idea exactly as to why, but I am getting really poor performance under BTRFS. I've tried with -o compress and without, single-disk and multi-disk configurations etc. yet the problem persists. Luckily though I don't really need high performance, but someone who does should first test BTRFS out and see if it is fast enough for their needs.



