From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933632AbcIFJxQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2016 05:53:16 -0400 Received: from out.selfhost.de ([82.98.82.95]:38135 "EHLO outgoing.selfhost.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933325AbcIFJxL (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Sep 2016 05:53:11 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 399 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 05:53:11 EDT From: Harald Dunkel To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: bcache vs bcachefs Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 11:46:28 +0200 Message-ID: <87wpip9x8r.fsf@sylvester.afaics.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi folks, I am pretty hesitant replacing the rock-solid ext4 by bcachefs on my servers. Meaning no offense, but surely I would prefer to have ext4 with a thin "SSD caching layer" over a completely different filesystem, potentially with alot of teething troubles. Question: Is bcache EOL or can I rely on it for the next 5 to 10 years? Regards Harri