/tech/ - Technology★

>2015

Has the story improved since then?

>>961946

no idea

btfrs has been a long running disaster and will likely just be abandoned. They never got the core of the thing working acceptably yet kept adding features due to all the corporate cash flowing into it.

>yikes

Don't talk like the faggots too afraid to say something strongly negative.

>>961952

Stupid ass jewish glow-in-the-dark unfinished nigger dogshit.

Better?

Next install I do will most likely be xfs+lvm instead of Beta Testing Redhat File System.

>>961974

ZFS.

>>961977

Same problem as btrfs, supreme bloat (even if it has an excuse). Tries to do compression, volume management (lvm) and RAID management (mdraid). Honestly, I just want a self-healing CoW FS, no dedup, compression and all that shit.

>>961980

Then you want HAMMER2.

ZFS has a good excuse as it's not bloated on Solaris and is more describes a series of coherent tools to manage disks rather than "just an FS".

Dedup is gay but compression can actually speed up your databases because you can get more throughput as you transfer from disk to CPU.

Listen to some talks from ZFS devs, they've done a lot of work that really helps you out when nasty shit like hard drives or raid controllers lying to you, ZFS to my knowledge is the only FS that treats hard drives as adversarial.

>>962004

>ZFS to my knowledge is the only FS that treats hard drives as adversarial.

Which is why AntegrOS is such a good OS, with out-of-the-box ZFS.

>>962004

>Dedup is gay

I guess you never had a gorillion VMs in your SAN that all have mostly the same few OSes and applications installed?

>>963097

Why not just use overlays?

>>963537

>ZFS on linux

>implying I said the software has no bugs

>>963689

When compared to BTRFS?