Re: Poll: time to switch skinny-metadata on by default?

[Konstantinos Skarlatos <k.skarlatos@gmail.com>]

On 21/10/2014 2:02 μμ, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
> On 2014-10-21 05:29, Duncan wrote:
>> David Sterba posted on Mon, 20 Oct 2014 18:34:03 +0200 as excerpted:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 01:33:37PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
>>>> I'd like to make it default with the 3.17 release of btrfs-progs.
>>>> Please let me know if you have objections.
>>>
>>> For the record, 3.17 will not change the defaults. The timing of the
>>> poll was very bad to get enough feedback before the release. Let's keep
>>> it open for now.
>>
>> FWIW my own results agree with yours, I've had no problem with skinny-
>> metadata here, and it has been my default now for a couple 
>> backup-and-new-
>> mkfs.btrfs generations, now.
>>
>> As you know there were some problems with it in the first kernel 
>> cycle or
>> two after it was introduced as an option, and I waited awhile until they
>> died down before trying it here, but as I said, no problems since I
>> switched it on, and I've been running it awhile now.
>>
>> So defaulting to skinny-metadata looks good from here. =:^)
>>
> Same here, I've been using it on all my systems since I switched from 
> 3.15 to 3.16, and have had no issues whatsoever.
>
I am using skinny-metadata for years, and only once had an issue with 
it. It was with scrub and was fixed by Liu Bo[1], so i think 
skinny-metadata is mature enough be a default.

[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg34493.html

-- 
Konstantinos Skarlatos