On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 5:19 AM, Gour-Gadadhara Dasa firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2011 09:38:52 +0200 Thomas Bächler email@example.com wrote:
Using LVM and software RAID is the right thing to do here. Any particular reason why you don't want it?
To have one layer less.
btrfs is not ZFS. and btrfs is still experimental, and I think there are some people here who had bad experience with it.
That's good to know. Thanks.
i can more or less echo what Jan said -- running here since circa .30 as well. i totally fsck'd (pun intended :-) my FS once, and have needed to zero the log tree twice in that time, although i likely punish the FS a bit more than average user likely ... the time i hosed it i was doing some funky --bind mounts *through* and *directly to* the "special" subvolume dirs.
if you want to use it you'll probably just want to keep close eye on development and be conservative about chosen options (eg. bootloaders cant handle compression/etc), but IME at least it's been pretty solid all things considered :-)
... if you need an external backup solution it works great as a fast/efficient differential system, whereby each "backup" is an really an in-place rsync to a new snapshot. there are folks working on a means to "remote-send" the FS to other destinations, now sure the exact details on that one.
... and the fsck appears to be literally days away ... Chris just mentioned it again a day or two ago before going on vacation, though it's seemed close for some time now. in short, it's definitely doable, and it's crammed with a bunch of interesting features, but you should at this point still be prepared to recover and/or lose it all (but to be fair, in a couple years on the list i haven't seen many FS'es totally nuked)