Live data from Hacker News

⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

access.redhat.com

91–100 of 352 posts

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#91

It's OT but how many people actually use RHEL? Or CentOS (more likely). I'm not a fan of systemd, but have really loathed CentOS/RHEL compared to Debian/* for years.

Redhat is worth billions of dollars. Someone must be using Redhat.

Tulips were sold for ridiculous prices, yet nobody used them.

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#93
post #60

I have used Btrfs in production and I would say it's great. It's super easy to just add an extra EBS volume and attach to a Btrfs volume and now you have more disk space. Performance is good enough for me as well, I used it as storage for InfluxDB and Docker. Luckily this is only Redhat, not Btrfs itself.

Unfortunately, RedHat tends to be the trendsetter in the Linux world. Once it's gone from RHEL, it'll be gone from most other RPM based distros soon enough. It's kind of a shame that one company has grown to dominate the Linux software ecosystem, often to the detriment of all involved.

RPM-based distros make up maybe 10 % of the Linux installations these days, so we should not overstate RedHat's influence.

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#94

Well I used btrfs as a root filesystem for quite a while, until I realized it was pig slow for sync() -- I mean, it would take AGES to do and apt-get upgrade for example. I ended up having to do some tasks using 'eatmydata' [0] to make it all better, risking filesystem corruption in trade for speed. Also, at the time, there was no functioning fsck. So I moved back safely to ext4 and never looked back! [0]: https://ww…

Over the recent years on every new laptop install i switched between filesystems, so i had ext3/4, btrfs and (currently) xfs on my system. I have to say, btrfs had the most glitches (a few years back), although it worked ok'ish (no data loss).

Nowadays, i must say that i very much prefer a stable filesystem with as little complicated logic as possible. I actually never use snapshots or subtrees! I never put another disk in my laptop (where would that go?!) so i don't need to do dynamic resizing (while online of course!). All this makes the filesystems a lot more complex then it has to be. I've also run into problems using ZFS on Solaris some years back which took ~2 weeks in dtracing what the hell is going on. Of course it was related to CoW.

My lessons learned: Check your requirements. Will you really need and use subtrees/snapshots/XYZ on your system? Will you really need to do online-resizing? If not, just use a stable, simple filesystem. There are perfect usecases for ZFS or btrfs. But not everyone needs the advanced features.

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#95

I tried btrfs and got bitten by bugs; not doing that again. Judging from this move by RH, it looks like I wasn't the only one.

What bugs?

I recently setup a software mirroring raid with btrfs and I'm loving features like checksumming. It makes me feel my data is quite safe and can't bit rot anymore. So far it is working fine.

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#97
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have one machine running XFS but if that one is representative then I won't be installing XFS anywhere else and would happily discourage others from using it. It is terribly slow when doing some fairly common operations when you have a large number of small files.

You're joking, surely. XFS has outperformed EXT4 in almost all "high" use-cases in my experience and testing: Large files (500GB~) or many small files (128k files * 2,400,000 or so). EXT4 under those loads is comically bad. BTRFS is also terrible at this, only XFS and ZFS are good at handling it.

On the other hand on database workloads, for example PostgreSQL, XFS and EXT4 are about equal these days. ZFS (at least on Linux) and Btrfs are both clearly slower on those workloads.

Here is one benchmark, but I have seen plenty of similar benchmark results for PostgreSQL showing the same thing: https://blog.pgaddict.com/posts/postgresql-performance-on-ex...

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#98

It's OT but how many people actually use RHEL? Or CentOS (more likely). I'm not a fan of systemd, but have really loathed CentOS/RHEL compared to Debian/* for years.

In enterprise installations people only install software that they can receive support for. So the biggest server farms probably all run something like RHEL or SLES.

Of course for private usage it's a little ove rthe top. But RH also offers solutions there. There's an upstream OS with all the cool stuff: Fedora. And a downstream OS that is just as stable as RHEL but free: CentOS (not sure if I get the name right. There are so many CabcOS out there nowadays).

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#99
post #45

Offtopic, but if anybody from RedHat and especially Mozilla read this, go to that page with an Android phone, possibly with a small screen: To RedHat: do something for that menu at the left. It stays in the way when scrolling and zooming. The X to close it is not immediately visible on a small screen. Expected behavior: the menu scrolls away with the page and doesn't stay fixed in the way of the reader. To Mozilla: o…

As I recall, the whole idea of text reflow in Firefox for Android has been abandoned because nobody was willing to fix broken code for a feature deemed no longer important for the modern web. (I'm sure following Google's decision to remove it from their browsers since KitKat also played a part, knowing modern Mozilla and their attitude.)

A real shame, especially for those coming from Presto-based Opera Mobile, which used to do reflow seamlessly and in a better layout than modern Blink-based Opera.

Fortunately, Firefox supports addons and you'll find at least a couple ones claiming to do the trick: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/fit-text-to-w... https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/android/addon/text-reflow/

Re: ⁠Btrfs has been deprecated in RHEL

#100
post #95

I tried btrfs and got bitten by bugs; not doing that again. Judging from this move by RH, it looks like I wasn't the only one.

What bugs? I recently setup a software mirroring raid with btrfs and I'm loving features like checksumming. It makes me feel my data is quite safe and can't bit rot anymore. So far it is working fine.

Hi.

Did you notice that the official description of RAID-1 is "Mostly working"? Are you aware if one of your drive fails, you have one chance to re-mirror it, before the remaining drive can no longer be mounted read-write and you need to dump the filesystem and re-create from scratch?

Post reply on HN