On Tue, 5 May 2015 06:56:20 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > > I don't know about btrfs, seems like it's still in a testing-phase so > > i'm not touching it yet. > > My understanding is that both zfs and btrfs on linux are fairly > experimental. The codebase for zfs is much more mature in general, > though its integration on Linux is recent.
It's also based on an older version of ZFS, so we can expect stability to improve where necessary, but little in the way of new features (unless that has changed since I last used it and Sun have open sourced a later release). > The codebase for btrfs > changes rapidly, with quite a few regressions. I've never > irrecoverably lost data on btrfs, but it wouldn't be my first choice > for a production environment unless I basically did my own QC on the > kernel. However, all my important data is on btrfs nonetheless (with > a full backup to ext4 daily right now). I have a similar approach, although with duplicity backups to a file server. I have had a couple of problems with btrfs on my laptop, connected with unclean shutdowns. I didn't lose any data but the repair process took a *long* time. -- Neil Bothwick The considered application of terror is also a form of communication.
pgpWyvTkw5ieJ.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
