From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francis Galiegue Subject: Re: Francis Galiegue would like your help testing a survey Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 20:47:14 +0200 Message-ID: References: <201009281427.o8SERvXj025316@84872-app3.sgizmo.com> <4CA2092A.8020207@noir.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: "K. Richard Pixley" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4CA2092A.8020207@noir.com> List-ID: [cc: list] On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 17:26, K. Richard Pixley wrote: > =C2=A0#2 needs an answer dealing with "stability". =C2=A0Unstable doe= sn't necessarily > mean polluted file systems. =C2=A0It can also mean pathological behav= ior, kernel > crashes, etc. > Yes, indeed. Fixed. > #4 needs an answer that involves performance - btrfs is, (arguably), = the > fastest file system currently available for linux in many situations.= =C2=A0That > answer alone is a serious selling point. > > Another selling point for #4 is file system hardening. =C2=A0ext2 is = still fast, > but it can't generally survive power failures. =C2=A0If you're specif= ically > looking for a fast file system, then the fact that btrfs competes wel= l in > speed and is also hardened becomes a selling point. > Well, performance is not touted as a key feature on the btrfs wiki. I have added "good overall performance" in the list of choices, though. As to file system hardening, what do you mean apart from checksums? =46undamental filesystem design? > #15 presupposes it's own answer. =C2=A0While I've had no filesystems = fail, every > machine I use with btrfs file systems has failed numerous times - > pathological behavior, kernel crashes, etc. =C2=A0In the absence of a= btrfsck I > can't be sure that the file system has actually failed although rebui= lding > the file system seems to alleviate the symptoms temporarily. > I don't really see your point here. Can you elaborate? And yes, I _do_ mean filesystem failures, not machine failure. I made that explicit. > #16 presupposes a failure mode.=C2=A0Again, my issues have more to do= with > stability than with clear cases of file system pollution. > Point taken, but again, this is on purpose, I talk here about hosed filesystems indeed. Thanks for the feedback! --=20 =46rancis Galiegue, fgaliegue@gmail.com "It seems obvious [...] that at least some 'business intelligence' tools invest so much intelligence on the business side that they have nothing left for generating SQL queries" (St=C3=A9phane Faroult, in "Th= e Art of SQL", ISBN 0-596-00894-5) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" = in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html