Re: newer kernels from experimental?
Am Donnerstag, 14. März 2013 schrieb Gary Dale:
> On 13/03/13 09:00 PM, Brad Alexander wrote:
> > While it isn't quite getting long in the tooth, sid is still sporting
> > the 3.2.x kernel. Now as I recall, Greg KH said that this would be the
> > next long term support kernel, but I would like to play with some of
> > the newer features from the later 3.x kernels from experimental, like
> > f2fs and btrfs. I was wondering if anyone is running any of them, and
> > if they are stable enough for day-to-day use.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --b
>
> I wouldn't use any of the newer file systems until they've been around
> in use for a couple of years. You can use btrfs now and I've heard that
> it's quite reliable but it depends on how much you value the new
> features versus the risk of losing your files.
Granted, it still not marked stable.
That said, I did not loose data with any of the BTRFS file systems I have in
use. And, heck, I can prove it by using scrubbing.
I started with my old Amarok ThinkPad, all BTFRFS, very aged and slow, but
also just a ThinkPad T23, then a local data volume at work, and then / on
this ThinkPad T520 with Intel SSD 320 and since about a month also /home.
Also my backup harddisks are all BTRFS now. I use snapshots to preserve
older versions of backups.
Of course I recommend staying with quite recent kernels if using BTRFS.
Also I suggest to do it step by step: Start with something that isn´t
critical to you. And once you feel safe you can extend.
That said, I think the risk to loose data with BTFRS is not higher anymore
than with Ext4 and XFS. But thats just my personal impression and I have no
statistics to prove it. But well does anyone have any? Search "your-
favorite-filesystem corruption" and you will always find tons of hits. But
which ones are real software issues?
--
Martin 'Helios' Steigerwald - http://www.Lichtvoll.de
GPG: 03B0 0D6C 0040 0710 4AFA B82F 991B EAAC A599 84C7
Reply to: