From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59305 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752897Ab3D0X3q (ORCPT ); Sat, 27 Apr 2013 19:29:46 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UWEYq-0001LJ-Qh for linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:29:44 +0200 Received: from 50-0-67-239.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com ([50.0.67.239]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:29:44 +0200 Received: from rogerb by 50-0-67-239.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 28 Apr 2013 01:29:44 +0200 To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org From: Roger Binns Subject: Re: data DUP Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:29:38 -0700 Message-ID: References: <20130420204814.GN7639@carfax.org.uk> <20130420212311.GO7639@carfax.org.uk> <1367098836.14073.5.camel@ayu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 In-Reply-To: <1367098836.14073.5.camel@ayu> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 27/04/13 14:40, Calvin Walton wrote: > Unfortunately, bugfixes in btrfs have tended to be *not* backported; > aside from a few special cases, ... Your efforts to scare me are admirable, but have failed :-) As btrfs development has progressed, the probability of a random user like me hitting bugs keeps decreasing. This is a reflection of the maturity of the code base, the increasing number of users, improved test suites, more eyes on the code, more diversity in uses etc. As far as I can see, backported bugfixes are made when the probability of a bug being encountered is significantly higher than the current probabilities, and that is why they are rare. As for the severity of the rarely hit bugs, the COW nature of the data means there is unlikely to be corruption, and if there is then of the most recent activity. Additionally the checksums mean it is possible to proactively verify (online) that unexpected corruption hasn't been creeping in. And if all that fails, I have multiple layers of backups. Roger -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlF8X14ACgkQmOOfHg372QT5EQCfSbzZBRdm1KyljpoNpP5kHy15 iFoAn2eyair54JQdhnL2dfvqAJrVMWe4 =9zYA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----