Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday August 02 2017, @03:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the bazaar?-what-bazaar?-this-is-my-cathedral dept.

In the release notes for RedHat Enterprise Linux 7.4 we can see the following:

The Btrfs file system has been in Technology Preview state since the initial release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. Red Hat will not be moving Btrfs to a fully supported feature and it will be removed in a future major release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

The Btrfs file system did receive numerous updates from the upstream in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.4 and will remain available in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 series. However, this is the last planned update to this feature.

Red Hat will continue to invest in future technologies to address the use cases of our customers, specifically those related to snapshots, compression, NVRAM, and ease of use. We encourage feedback through your Red Hat representative on features and requirements you have for file systems and storage technology.

Btrfs, originally developed by Oracle and now also by SUSE and others, seems to have lost Red Hat as supporter. So what is ahead? RH isn't very clear. ZFS had license issues since day one, and is currently under Oracle umbrella, making a change near impossible. Does this mean improving XFS? Some other FS to be announce soon? Will Red Hat push its weight around like in other cases? Will other distros hold their ground or bow? Unix wars all over again, this time in Linux and FOSS land.

Maybe time to update it to Corporate Open Source Software, COSS, you can look but forget about having a voice among the big guys. The bazaar is dead, long live the cathedral. Or time to fork them off.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by KiloByte on Wednesday August 02 2017, @09:16PM

    by KiloByte (375) on Wednesday August 02 2017, @09:16PM (#548118)

    If you have, it was due to bad drives or bad power, which no file system can get around.

    But if I lose data to a bad drive (and there's no such thing as a "good" drive in the long run), I do want to know when and what I lost. With btrfs, I take it from nightly backup (single or raid0) or the filesystem itself takes it from the other copy automatically (redundant¹ raid). With ext4, I have no clue, and the loss is likely to cause actual damage rather than at most a short downtime.

    btrfs has been on my ban list

    And ext4 is on mine. Despite years of heavy use of btrfs, I have yet to lose data to it (hardware failures and test systems with intentional mucking around obviously excluded). I'm no btrfs dev yet I try to help them — you can come too if you wish.

    It was starting to become the systemd of file systems, (that is an insult to systemd, which is far more stable)

    WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK?!? Now this was uncalled for. Not even fat is that bad!!!

    You never knew just how much available space you actually had on a btrfs machine, it took a great deal of digging and calculating.

    inode limit on ext{2,3,4} anyone?

    [¹]. Yeah, "redundant raid" sounds redundant, but someone had the bright idea of naming raid0 thusly.

    --
    Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2