BTRFS

jack.mitchell · 22 Nov 2011 at 15:20

Is anyone here using BTRFS, I'm soon going to be setting up a server and want to use btrfs to manage 5 2tb hard drives preferably in some sort of raid 5 parity style array.

I know there are lots of upcoming improvements in 3.2, but I want to get some opinions first hand to see if anyone is currently using it. I would also be interested if you could be using it but aren't.

The other option I was looking at was ZFS but I would run this under Solaris I guess...

I will most likely be using Archlinux as the host distribution.

SMN · 22 Nov 2011 at 18:06

Too unstable for me. I think you can run ZFS on Linux now, I seem to remember it being ported?

PermaBanned · 22 Nov 2011 at 18:14

Every time i've tried installing Arch using an "alternative" filesystem to EXT it just hasn't worked at all, resulted in my not being able to boot into anything and having to start over, basically. But then i did just use the default settings and everything from the installer, might be different if you used something like GParted to set up partitions before you install.

I'd be interested to hear how it goes, and if you fancy doing any speed comparisons...

Essexraptor · 22 Nov 2011 at 18:35

SMN said:
Too unstable for me. I think you can run ZFS on Linux now, I seem to remember it being ported?

here

http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#DoIHaveToUseECCMemory

deano · 22 Nov 2011 at 20:24

on servers i'd only use EXT3 / EXT4 under Linux. I understand freeBSD has had ZFS for a while.

SMN · 22 Nov 2011 at 20:32

Essexraptor said:
here

http://zfsonlinux.org/faq.html#DoIHaveToUseECCMemory

A medal for you sir!

memyselfandi · 22 Nov 2011 at 22:05

I wouldn't use btrfs yet on a server which I cared about the content ... its just not stable enough to be production ready yet, hell last time I looked it didn't even have an fsck tool yet ...

Personally on Linux I would normally go with ext3 or 4 (dependent on distribution being used) ... I like ZFS on Solaris but the lack of native mainstream distribution support and the requirement to disable SELinux (from the link above) would put me off trying to apply it to a Linux system.

Essexraptor · 22 Nov 2011 at 23:52

SMN said:
A medal for you sir!

Nah....

...... I was just researching RAM requirements over different ZFS supporting OS's and had it bookmarked already

Total minefield area ... with so many different spins on it.

SMN · 23 Nov 2011 at 08:26

From what I remember reading, BTFS is theoretically (correct me if im wrong) one of the fastest FS's for SSD's?

BusError · 23 Nov 2011 at 09:14

I use btrfs as the "root" for a couple of machines. It does have advantages like the snapshot facility that is pretty awesome for backups.
However, I think I'll revert to ext4 next time the opportunity occurs, as btrfs has a few choices that I find a bit questionable. For example on debian apt-get is /dog slow/ as in /unusable/ because of the way sync() is implemented.

So, I think it's stable enough (the root on my workstation (that I actually use to work ;-)

is using it) for production, but quite frankly the performances in day-to-day use sucks.

jack.mitchell · 23 Nov 2011 at 09:24

My real goal is here is have a raid 5 array which I can dynamically add to as I buy/replace disks with different sizes and manufacturers. Is this possible with ext4?

BusError · 23 Nov 2011 at 11:47

You can always do that with the underlying "md" raid driver; that's stable for years and you can use any filesystem on top, regardless

deano · 23 Nov 2011 at 20:09

leezer3 · 26 Nov 2011 at 01:59

I've been using XFS on my server for years now

It was originally a choice between XFS & ext3 for data drives, and IIRC I decided on XFS as it handled bigger files and drives much better. Haven't tried ext4- XFS does just fine.

-Leezer-

PermaBanned · 26 Nov 2011 at 02:37

Yeah, doing a bit of reading seems to point towards XFS for large files, and Reiser for small. Like your /var partition. But really you'd have to try them all and work out what works best for you if you really want to be efficient, might take a while though

I'm still not sure how you set up partitions in gparted rather than the Arch 'installer'...

jack.mitchell · 26 Nov 2011 at 19:04

You can do it by defining the mount points and not partitioning in the arch installer, I've done it before so it can't be rocket science

!

Hairybudda · 26 Nov 2011 at 20:04

I try it out every now and then, i'm long overdue another look, the complete lack of a fsck is what drives me away every time.

Oh, I'm also a reiserfs fanboy, Hans Reiser is a complete nutjob, his wiki page has a brief look at the guy behind the filesystem.

Balthazar B · 20 Feb 2012 at 00:58

Bit of an old thread, but as an update BTRFS is getting pretty close to stable with fsck apparently done and in testing at Oracle. It may begin showing up over the summer as one of the standard filesystem choices in various flavours of Linux (Fedora 18, Ubuntu 12-10 beta). The situation with ZFS on Linux is just too torturous at present for more than niche uses, but BTRFS could emerge as the favorite for general purpose Linux server systems.

Balthazar B · 20 Feb 2012 at 01:01

Forgot to mention. Excellent summary of BTRFS in this recent article.

jack.mitchell · 21 Feb 2012 at 10:39

Yes, I've been following it. Unfortunatly my server now has a 10TB Software Raid 5 on ext4 so I don't think that will be changing anytime soon! It was a nice idea, just a bit too late for my needs.