Linked by Rahul on Fri 31st Oct 2008 16:12 UTC
Linux InternetNews talks to developers and vendors about the rise of Btrfs as a successor to Ext4. Though Ext4 adds extents, Chris Mason, Btrfs developer noted that BTRFS adds a number of other features beyond that. Among those features are items like snapshotting, online file consistency checks and the ability to perform fast incremental backups. BTRFS (pronounced better FS) is currently under development in an effort led by Oracle engineer Chris Mason. With the support of Intel, Red Hat, HP, IBM, BTRFS could become the engine that brings next generation filesystem capabilities to Linux.
Permalink for comment 335968
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Funny
by segedunum on Sat 1st Nov 2008 15:31 UTC in reply to "Funny"
Member since:

Another article about Linux filesystems and BtrFS, yet more comments about ZFS :-).

It is funny that some Linux people thinks that preventing silent corruption is not important, when discussing ZFS.

Well, it is and it isn't. Silent corruption is generally the result of problems elsewhere, and in the case of Solaris, usually its the pretty arcane and old device drivers. Unless you're prepared to use ZFS to find out what went wrong and to fix it, the frenzied excitement over ZFS detecting 'silent corruption' is pretty laughable.

In the case of silent corruption as a result of hardware, well, you aren't going to recover anything if you don't have redundancy, regardless of whether you run ZFS or not. In any event, you want to solve the issue rather than detecting it and thinking you're brilliant, and either the hardware gets fixed or you move to something else. Either way, it's a hardware issue and drives in particular need to get better and do their own data integrity checks. That issue will not change with a new filesystem.

Now that BTRFS will support that feature, I promise you that soon these people will say it's the most important thing since sliced bread.

I hope not, because it isn't.

I think they are funny.

I think you're funny. If ZFS (or BtrFS) detects silent corruption then you need to do something about it. If you can't, and in most cases you can't really fix it because it's an esoteric hardware or driver issue, then the feature is essentially useless. You will forever be firefighting and without redundancy you will lose data regardless.

In many ways, its a feature more useful to pass on to kernel developers and hardware manufacturers because they're the ones who can do something about it. I suppose those who can make best use of it will be those with the better development community ;-).

Soon SEGEDUNUM also will change his mind and praise prevention of silent corruption.

Thanks for mentioning me by name, and in capitals no less :-). No, I'm afraid I'm not going to do that for reasons I have described ;-).

But not until Linux has that feature. Until then, detection and prevention of silent corruption is not important.

I'm sorry, but while some form of silent corruption detection is nice, your problems have only just started. I feel for you that silent corruption detection just hasn't generated the level of excitement intended with ZFS, and henceforth Solaris, but there you are.

Edited 2008-11-01 15:34 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2