[ale] BTRFS - used it?

[Ed Cashin]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 1:12 PM, David W. Millians<millia at panix.com> wrote:
...
> Is this another one of those cases, like Debian testing, where the
> 'instability' is highly exaggerated? I'm not going to be thrashing a drive
> with this, just storing and serving with it.
>
> I do realize I'll have to load a custom kernel, of course. I'm just more
> interested in the real-world stability of BTRFS.

I don't think that the 'instability' is highly exaggerated in this case.
The reason is that I was listening to a recent (the latest?) Linux
Kernel Mailing List Podcast episode from Jon Masters, and he
mentioned that Chris Mason had pushed a bunch of last minute
patches for btrfs into a new Linux kernel.  Now normally, that would
not be OK, since at the last minute only bugfixes are supposed to
be going in, but in this case Jon said they'd probably be accepted.

The reason is that btrfs is widely considered to be highly developmental
(I for get the exact wording.) as opposed to stable.  What that means
to me is that the folks who could be making btrfs relatively more stable
are instead concentrating on streamlining the development effort.

I don't have any information besides that, though, or any experience
with btrfs.  If you try it, please let us know what you find out.

-- 
  Ed Cashin <ecashin at noserose.net>