Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SUSE Pledges Endless Love for btrfs; Says Red Hat's Dumping Irrelevant

posted by Fnord666 on Monday August 28 2017, @10:08AM   Printer-friendly
from the a-bitter-fs dept.

MrPlow writes:

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

SUSE has decided to let the world know it has no plans to step away from the btrfs filesystem, and plans to make it even better.

The company's public display of affection comes after Red Hat decided not to fully support the filesystem in its own Linux.

Losing a place in one of the big three Linux distros isn't a good look for any package even if, as was the case with this decision, Red Hat was never a big contributor or fan of btrfs.

[Matthias G. Eckermann] also hinted at some future directions for the filesystem. "We just start to see the opportunities from subvolume quotas when managing Quality of Service on the storage level" he writes, adding "Compression (already there) combined with Encryption (future) makes btrfs an interesting choice for embedded systems and IoT, as may the full use of send-receive for managing system patches and updates to (Linux based) 'firmware'." ®

Mmmmmm... butter-fs

Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/25/suse_btrfs_defence/

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
SUSE Pledges Endless Love for btrfs; Says Red Hat's Dumping Irrelevant | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 30 comments | Search Discussion
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 Monday August 28 2017, @07:43PM

    by KiloByte (375) on Monday August 28 2017, @07:43PM (#560442)

    One of the last pieces was file system check for btrfs. I read that it finally exists, but "it is not well-tested in real-life situations yet." Yeesh.

    Eh? Offline fsck for btrfs exists since 2007, btrfs itself was merged into mainline kernel in 2009. WhereTF are you pulling this data from?

    No, built-in fsck on the fly the way btrfs does it isn't a replacement for offline fsck, you know, with the volumes NOT mounted. How else do you guarantee nothing else is altering the file system during a repair attempt?

    Unlike most filesystems, usually btrfs does not require to be unmounted in order to check for damage and repair it. Yeah, some damage can't be repaired live, but it's better if common cases don't require downtime.

    --
    Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2