[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] btrfs status and/was: preserve_old_lib
From:       Rich Freeman <rich0 () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2012-02-25 1:54:17
Message-ID: CAGfcS_=gyw_z7yV8KPMByDXZ5Oeou4wSLdXPC_QJ8LGuXe_y-Q () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@cs.stonybrook.edu> wrote:
> Have you tried ZFS?

Yes - but not terribly interested in doing that on linux.  I do
appreciate that it can be done, but still lacks raid-z reshaping,
which means it isn't quite flexible enough.

> On 02/24/12 18:26, Duncan wrote:
>> FWIW, in the rare event it breaks revdep-rebuild or the underlying
>>  rebuilding itself, I rely on my long set FEATURES=buildpkg and
>> emerge -K.

I also use buildpkg, but I don't keep them around forever.

>> I'm not sure if that's a reference to the btrfs snapshots allowing
>>  rollbacks feature, or a hint that you're running it and worried
>> about its stability underneath you...

That would be the former.  I'm QUITE aware of its stability.

I've played around with it on a VM - I posted on my blog an experience
with it around a year ago as well.  It has come quite a way, but it is
definitely not production quality.  Xfs-tools is useful if you want to
try breaking it - I think I posted on my blog an article about
capturing linux kernel core dumps for debugging purposes - it panics
quite readily.

If you do want to mess with it I'd recommend using the git kernel
maintained by the btrfs team.  It is obviously bleeding-edge, but due
to the high pace of fixes it tends to be more stable than the version
in the mainline kernel.

Rich

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]