I sure hope nobody recommends me to use a free and open source operating system that never has issues like this over this proprietary OS that I’m used too and have been paying licensing fees for since I started using computers.
I live dangerously with my fully up to date Arch box.
But I also have an LTS Ubuntu box that’s been humming away in the background for about the last five-ish years? Just a quiet little file server, doing its job and being ignored.
LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX
I’ve only recently been made aware of btrfs’ tendency to completely fuck data at failure states.
I’ve been using that filesystem on fedora for maybe two years now without issue, though I suppose I don’t regularly find myself hitting the issues required to cause these problems.
It has now been nearly eight years since the “experimental” tag was removed, but many of btrfs’ age-old problems remain unaddressed and effectively unchanged. So, we’ll repeat this once more: as a single-disk filesystem, btrfs has been stable and for the most part performant for years. But the deeper you get into the new features btrfs offers, the shakier the ground you walk on—that’s what we’re focusing on today.
So if you’re just using it for your PC hard drive you’re probably fine. The problem is that BTRFS is intended to provide similar features to RAID and ZFS, but that’s where it starts failing.
I sure hope nobody recommends me to use a free and open source operating system that never has issues like this over this proprietary OS that I’m used too and have been paying licensing fees for since I started using computers.
Linux has had its fair share of nasty bugs
The difference is that you are unlikely to be affected unless you are running a very recent untested kernel.
I live dangerously with my fully up to date Arch box.
But I also have an LTS Ubuntu box that’s been humming away in the background for about the last five-ish years? Just a quiet little file server, doing its job and being ignored.
LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX
fuck linux and every fanboy it has
Because you got older and realized just because your teachers and parents wasted their money now that you’re an adult there a better way?
ever use BTRFS?
I’ve only recently been made aware of btrfs’ tendency to completely fuck data at failure states.
I’ve been using that filesystem on fedora for maybe two years now without issue, though I suppose I don’t regularly find myself hitting the issues required to cause these problems.
Well yeah, like the article I linked says:
So if you’re just using it for your PC hard drive you’re probably fine. The problem is that BTRFS is intended to provide similar features to RAID and ZFS, but that’s where it starts failing.
fuck linux bloody