Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th May 2009 20:34 UTC, submitted by linuxmag
"Following up on our introductory article on Btrfs, Jeff Layton talked with Chris Mason, Director of Linux Kernel Engineering at Oracle and the founder and lead developer of Btrfs."
Thread beginning with comment 364002
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2007-07-27
Just a question out of curiousity, how come you Segedunum is ALWAYS involved in infected posts like this? I dont get it. Always. Some personal trait of yours. If there is an infected thread here, 80-90% of the time Segedunum is involved.
(I am glad that I am not involved in this).
Member since:2005-07-06
Just a question out of curiousity, how come you Segedunum is ALWAYS involved in infected posts like this?
Yawn. Troll................ You have nothing to add to the topic once again. For one thing this isn't an article about Sun or anything Sun related so I wonder why you still take the time to post your inane ramblings. Come to think of it, I wonder how we ever got to attacks on Btrfs by ZFS proponents desperate to point the fingers of NIH syndrome and layering violations. ROTFL.
(I am glad that I am not involved in this).
Too late.
Member since:
2005-07-06
Hmmmm, no, because Chris explicitly said that Btrfs will be resusing md and features will be added to md so that Btrfs gets what it needs.
Managing multiple devices within a filesystem and allowing a filesystem to know about devices is not equivalent to pulling and duplicating code wholesale from md, which is the direction you're trying to go in.
Yep, and Chris still said that they will be reusing md for Btrfs and adding features to it.
Does it? That's not what Chris explicitly said, and which I pointed out in bold.
Hmmm, nope. I quoted what you missed and you still want to see what you want to see.
Seeing above and it doesn't state anything which you want to imply.
Yep, that's if you use Btrfs in a md container which is logical, and if you use Btrfs's RAID you will still be using the md layer itself. Chris has explicitly stated that features will be added to the md subsystem that will allow communication between the two and in all probability allow other filesystems to implement exactly what Btrfs does without a RAID md container but still using common md code. There's a little thing called refactoring going on there.
Nope, it doesn't say that at all. It says they will use md but it certainly does not say that they'll end up just copying and pasting md and RAID code into Btrfs. If that was the case then they wouldn't be refactoring md and 'abstracting it out'.
I know, I know. Alas, you're still wrong. Sorry.
Edited 2009-05-17 22:05 UTC