Thread (28 messages) 28 messages, 10 authors, 2011-01-27

Re: btrfs, broken design?

From: Benoît Thiébault <hidden>
Date: 2011-01-21 05:25:09

Thanks for your answer

Le 20 janv. 2011 =E0 22:20, Chris Mason a =E9crit :
There was a bug fixed as part of that discussion, and I think I also
better described the way the tree balancing works to Edward.
Maybe the wikipedia article should be modified then, because it is not =
very reinsuring :-)
A final release?  We'll keep improving things for a long time.  The
biggest missing feature today is btrfsck, which I'm working on full t=
ime
right now.
=20
-chris
Still on the wikipedia page, it's written "Btrfs 1.0 (with finalized on=
-disk format) was originally slated for a late 2008 release,[5] but a s=
table release has not been made as of January 2011.", which is also ver=
y confusing.

According to you, is the version of btrfs in 2.6.37 ready for productio=
n? I mean, are there still chances that I may loose all my data if I us=
e btrfs?

Last question, do you know when the RAID-5 like capabilities will be av=
ailable?

Sorry to ask so many questions, I fully understand you and your team ar=
e working very hard on the project, but I was very confused by the Wiki=
pedia article.

Kind regards,

Ben--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" =
in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help