From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-vc0-f180.google.com ([209.85.220.180]:52178 "EHLO mail-vc0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755303AbaHFBSV (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Aug 2014 21:18:21 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id ij19so2981668vcb.11 for ; Tue, 05 Aug 2014 18:18:20 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1875052.8GFlAMfPzL@quad> <5484676.xyTNESz9qN@xev> Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 21:18:20 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ENOSPC with mkdir and rename From: Nick Krause To: ronnie sahlberg Cc: Russell Coker , Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>, Btrfs BTRFS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:38 PM, ronnie sahlberg wrote: > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 5:20 AM, Russell Coker wrote: > >> >> Based on what I've read on this list it seems that BTRFS is less stable in >> 3.15 than in 3.14. Even 3.14 isn't something I'd recommend to random people >> who want something to just work. >> >> The Debian installer has BTRFS in a list of filesystems to choose with no >> special notice about it. I'm thinking of filing a Debian bug requesting that >> they put a warning against it. >> >> What do people here think? > > +1 for a warning. > > btrfs is still a young filesystem and not as stable as say ext4. > I think it would be very prudent to have a small warning. > -- > 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 I agree here and feel this is very important. +1 Nick