Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 400 posts

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#361

Post by jcgl »

guenthert wrote: post #188
ThatPlayer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me bcachefs provides a feature no other filesystem on Linux has: automated tiered storage. I've wanted this ever since I got an SSD more than 10 years ago, but filesystems move slow. A block level cache like bcache (not fs) and dm-cache handles it less ideally, and doesn't leave the SSD space as usable space. As a home user, 2TB of SSDs is 2TB of space I'd rather have. ZFS's ZIL is similar, not leaving it as usab…

> automated tiered storage. I've wanted this ever since I got an SSD more than 10 years ago, but filesystems move slow. You were not alone. However, things changed, namely SSD continued to become cheaper and grew in capacity. I'd think most active data is these days on SSDs (certainly in most desktops, most servers which aren't explicit file or DB servers and all mobile and embedded devices), the role of spinning rus…

Until $/GB drops to comparable to HDDs, large-scale storage will continue to use HDDs.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#362

Post by solarkraft »

koverstreet wrote: post #286
mort96 wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You get a ton of comments like this because it's true. There are real problems in the kernel, I've seen how hostile it can be to people who are just trying to do the right thing and upstream their changes etc. But your case isn't that. Your behavior would get you in trouble at any job where you have to follow rules set by other people. Your refusal to treat your part of the kernel as anything other than your personal…

That's because it is my project, and my responsibility. I can't be bowing to the demands of any one person; I have to balance the wants and needs of everyone and prioritize shipping something that works above all else. Repeatedly we've seen that those priorities are not shared, unfortunately. Arguments are just as heated as they ever were, but now instead of arguing over the actual issues - does this work, are we doi…

> But my core mission is just shipping a reliable trustworthy filesystem

You’re very successful at building the file system, but your attempt at shipping it appears to have largely failed. This is a tragic bummer.

Even if working with Linus is hard (and even if he is behaving irrationally), it’s what would’ve allowed you to get bcachefs in hundreds of millions of users’ hands. This seems worthy of a compromise considering all of the work that went into building it. Now almost nobody will be able to use it.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#363

Post by solarkraft »

koverstreet wrote: post #303
mort96 wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can't be bowing to the demands of any one person This right here is the core of the issue. When you're working as a part of a larger organizational structure, you have to bow down to your boss. When your software is a part of the kernel, it's not your project anymore; it's just one part of Linus's project. You're a contributor, not a leader. Just like I would not control Bcachefs's development process even if I c…

Linus isn't my boss, though. Am I paid by him or the Linux foundation? No. Has he ever contributed to bcachefs in any way, is he in any way responsible for making sure that it works properly? No. The only sense in which he has authority is that he can decide whether or not to pull it into his tree, but that's a two way relationship.

He is not your boss. But he is the BDFL of the project you (and all of us) want bcachefs to be contributed to.

In an ideal scenario for you there would be more of a two way relationship with him meeting your demands, but he has all of the leverage in this situation. It doesn’t even matter how wrong he may be: He controls the kernel and that’s where file systems belong.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#364

Post by ajb »

philipallstar wrote: post #359
dralley wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. As someone who likes bcachefs and even literally donates to Kent's patreon, the way he has gone about engaging with the kernel community is not productive. Unfortunately. CoC isn't even the issue, he constantly breaks kernel development rules relating to the actual code, then starts arguments with everyone up to and including Linus when he gets called out, and aggressively misses the point every time. Then starts…

I think it is partly about code of conduct issues[0]. I totally agree that Linus can run whatever release process he likes, and Overbeck should get in line with that. However all of the accompanying sighing at how many times we've had to explain things to him from others is not okay. So what if more discussion is needed or wanted? People doing difficult work might have strong opinions. People doing easy work (e.g. se…

Interesting mashup there of Kent Beck and Kent Overstreet :-)

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#365

Post by koverstreet »

jjaksic wrote: post #351
koverstreet wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linus isn't my boss, though. Am I paid by him or the Linux foundation? No. Has he ever contributed to bcachefs in any way, is he in any way responsible for making sure that it works properly? No. The only sense in which he has authority is that he can decide whether or not to pull it into his tree, but that's a two way relationship.

Linus is not your boss in the sense that he pays you and can tell you what you do day o day, but he is your "boss" in the sense that he's the one who ultimately approves your work (which includes both your code and your conduct). It's a "two-way street" (you can walk away as much as he), but you need to understand that this is not an equal relationship. It might have been if Linux did not yet have a file system and y…

No, it's not an equal relationship. Linus and the kernel do not have a great track record on filesystems :)

XFS has been burning through maintainers, and btrfs never fully stabilized. Given that, it doesn't make sense for anyone to be trying to dictate; that's a track record that should be cause for reexamining how we do things.

Working with the kernel has been extremely disruptive to bcachefs development and the community, so as with anyone else who's being disruptive and not listening, at some point I have to say "enough is enough, you're taking up too much of my time, we can work together again when you figure some things out".

I do not strictly need bcachefs to be in the kernel. I do need a functioning release process and a stable community free of drama.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#366

Post by m-p-3 »

wtallis wrote: post #346
m-p-3 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context: I mostly dealt with RAID1 in a home NAS setup A ZFS pool will remain available even in degraded mode, and correct me if I'm wrong but with BTRFS you mount the array through one of the volume that is part of the array and not the array itself.. so if that specific mounted volume happens to go down, the array becomes unavailable unmounted until you remount another available volume that is part of the array whi…

> with BTRFS you mount the array through one of the volume that is part of the array and not the array itself I don't think btrfs has a concept of having only some subvolumes usable. Either you can mount the filesystem or you can't. What may have confused you is that you can mount a btrfs filesystem by referring to any individual block device that it uses, and the kernel will track down the others. But if the one dev…

> I don't think btrfs has a concept of having only some subvolumes usable. Either you can mount the filesystem or you can't.

You can still mount the BTRFS array as degraded if you specify it during mount. But then this lead to some others issues like the missing data written while degraded will not be automatically be copied over without doing a scrub, while ZFS will resilver it automatically, etc

> You can prevent the issue in the first place by identifying the filesystem by UUID instead of by an individual block device.

I tried that, but all it does is select the first available block device during mount, so if that device goes down, the mount also goes down.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#367

Post by yencabulator »

koverstreet wrote: post #338
trueismywork wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing in circles. Either bcachefs is experimental and hence needs a lot of changes and tools to make sure that users dont lose data and hence the fixes are not critical/users can use a custom branch. Or it is stable and the only thing users need is actual big fixes. Not new tools in an RC3. Don't compare bcachefs with btrfs for stability. Compare it with ext4. (And dont care anecdotal data, compare the proce…

So, are we agreeing that btrfs isn't fit for purpose, then?

Kent, whenever you're at a point where you could make a good decision and make progress on any non-technical axis, you choose to attack something or someone. This is why you're getting the reactions you are getting. bcachefs design looks good, literally everything else about the project is miserable, because of this.

Now, I fully expect you to react poorly to this message, too. That is the expectation the world has formed of you. Think about that.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#368

Post by koverstreet »

trueismywork wrote: post #326
koverstreet wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does seem to be one of the big disconnects, yes. In the past I've argued that I do need a relatively free hand and to be able to move quickly, and explained my reasoning: we've been at the stage of stabilization where the userbase is fairly big, and when someone reports a bug we really need to work with them and fix it in a timely manner in order to keep them testing and reporting bugs. When someone learns the s…

I have seen your work and have some experience in kernel development. I think the situation is bad for everyone involved: you and linux. I would suggest trying to restart the conversation only focused on experimental feature changes. In specific, I think there should be am effort to have a label (doesn't matter what one, hidden behind something like "icantbelieveitsnotbcachefs") where then you're (and not just you bu…

There have been multiple attempts to mediate and refocus on just that.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#369

Post by philipallstar »

ajb wrote: post #364
philipallstar wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is partly about code of conduct issues[0]. I totally agree that Linus can run whatever release process he likes, and Overbeck should get in line with that. However all of the accompanying sighing at how many times we've had to explain things to him from others is not okay. So what if more discussion is needed or wanted? People doing difficult work might have strong opinions. People doing easy work (e.g. se…

Interesting mashup there of Kent Beck and Kent Overstreet :-)

Sorry! Yes. Agile filesystems incoming.

Re: Bcachefs Goes to "Externally Maintained"

#370

Post by [deleted] »

koverstreet wrote: post #365
jjaksic wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linus is not your boss in the sense that he pays you and can tell you what you do day o day, but he is your "boss" in the sense that he's the one who ultimately approves your work (which includes both your code and your conduct). It's a "two-way street" (you can walk away as much as he), but you need to understand that this is not an equal relationship. It might have been if Linux did not yet have a file system and y…

No, it's not an equal relationship. Linus and the kernel do not have a great track record on filesystems :) XFS has been burning through maintainers, and btrfs never fully stabilized. Given that, it doesn't make sense for anyone to be trying to dictate; that's a track record that should be cause for reexamining how we do things. Working with the kernel has been extremely disruptive to bcachefs development and the com…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN