Windows on Btrfs • Hacker News Board

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#11

Post by easton » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 9:56 PM UTC

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #8

I am sure this will break the second time you run Windows Update.

I wouldn’t be so sure, Windows is famously annoying to goof with the boot loader on from a running install. You usually need to boot from another system to fix/reinstall it (at least, you did last time I needed to bring back the Windows bootloader on a borked dual boot).

Although, since UWP doesn’t work it’s a moot point, that means you probably can’t run Windows Update.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#12

Post by csdvrx » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 9:56 PM UTC

skanga wrote: post #6

Can someone please explain the advantages of doing this?

Why keep different filesystems outside of specific performance needs? I've experimented with weirder things, like Linux running on NTFS with the new kernel driver.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#13

Post by rbanffy » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 9:56 PM UTC

A more sensible approach would be to have a separate data volume to store important stuff on and leave it as BtrFS while letting Windows and Windows software run off NTFS.

But, then, what’d be the fun of having a computer you don’t need to fix?

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#14

Post by LanternLight83 » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 9:57 PM UTC

kitsunesoba wrote: post #5

Interesting, I would've expected more Windows software to just assume NTFS with some fallbacks for (ex)fat given how there haven't really been any other options for quite some time. How stable is Btrfs these days? Remember reading years ago that it was bad about spontaneously corrupting itself for no apparent reason. Curious if something similar is possible with ZFS.

It's really matured, and although the RAID5/6 Write Hole still exists, I wouldn't reccomend a ZDEV over RAID10 either, which is what I believe offers the best tradeoffs for most users on both filesystems. Love the flexibility that BTRFS provides via eg. the balance comand, and Snapper is great for snapshot management.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#15

Post by rbanffy » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 9:58 PM UTC

speed_spread wrote: post #3

Too bad the article doesn't talk about performance vs NTFS. Any quick and dirty comparative benchmark would have been nice. But then again, If BTRFS had been slower than NTFS it could have been due to a suboptimal (re)implementation.

I think nothing these days can perform worse than NTFS. I’ve been using Windows on my corporate issue laptop and anything that includes disk IO is a huge pain.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#16

Post by qbasic_forever » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 10:00 PM UTC

Haha wow that is so ridiculous it's awesome. Seeing both the Linux root and Windows root with Program Files living right next to usr, etc. is _wild_. Very cool hack!

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#17

Post by LukeShu » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 10:00 PM UTC

kitsunesoba wrote: post #5

Interesting, I would've expected more Windows software to just assume NTFS with some fallbacks for (ex)fat given how there haven't really been any other options for quite some time. How stable is Btrfs these days? Remember reading years ago that it was bad about spontaneously corrupting itself for no apparent reason. Curious if something similar is possible with ZFS.

IMO, it became stable somewhere between 2013 and 2016. I definitely haven't had any spontaneous corruption since at least 2016 (on multiple laptops and servers; btrfs volumes that mid-double-digit of terabytes)

That said,

- My BDB and SQLite databases tend to corrupt if my laptop battery dies and they're on a volume that's not on LUKS.

- `btrfs check` (fsck), `btrfs rescue`, and `btrfs restore` are IMO not up to snuff if you do encounter corruption (caused by something else, like a failing drive). (But I'm working on that https://git.lukeshu.com/btrfs-progs-ng/ !)

- `docker build` is weirdly slow on btrfs, I always set up a separate ext4 `/var/lib/docker` volume.

- I do RAID and encryption separately in MD or LVM and LUKS, so no comments from me about the stability of btrfs' built-in RAID cor encryption.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#18

Post by rbanffy » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 10:01 PM UTC

skanga wrote: post #6

Can someone please explain the advantages of doing this?

It forces you to understand how Windows functions on unexpected conditions and that knowledge can be extrapolated to other situations where something on Windows fails for no apparent reason and you just know it because you saw it before.

Do not underestimate the power of arcane knowledge.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#19

Post by kitsunesoba » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 10:01 PM UTC

rbanffy wrote: post #15

speed_spread wrote: post #3

Too bad the article doesn't talk about performance vs NTFS. Any quick and dirty comparative benchmark would have been nice. But then again, If BTRFS had been slower than NTFS it could have been due to a suboptimal (re)implementation.

I think nothing these days can perform worse than NTFS. I’ve been using Windows on my corporate issue laptop and anything that includes disk IO is a huge pain.

Some amount of that might be coming from Windows Defender and similar, but yeah NTFS isn't exactly a speed demon.

Re: Windows on Btrfs

#20

Post by garaetjjte » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 10:05 PM UTC

kitsunesoba wrote: post #19

rbanffy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think nothing these days can perform worse than NTFS. I’ve been using Windows on my corporate issue laptop and anything that includes disk IO is a huge pain.

Some amount of that might be coming from Windows Defender and similar, but yeah NTFS isn't exactly a speed demon.

Nothing particularly wrong with NTFS, it's Windows filesystem architecture that is slow.