On 6/27/2020 7:32 PM, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 2:46 PM Ben Cotton <bcot...@redhat.com> wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BtrfsByDefault
A few claims (without justification):
There is no "average" Fedora user.
There is no "average" Fedora system.
fedoraproject.org
Indeed not.
For what it's worth, I started with ZFS on Fedora, and got a little
irritated that it wasn't ready for 32 when 32 was released. So on the
advice of a friend, I migrated my ZFS volumes to BTRFS. They've been
stable and reliable for me. I'm not doing anything crazy - just some
subvolumes on single disks. ZFS was pretty heavy for that, and I didn't
enjoy the complexity of managing dkms drivers and the odd edge cases it
brings with it. Meanwhile, BTRFS does the things that I wanted to be
able to do with ZFS. Nothing I couldn't do with LVM, but I wanted to
try BTRFS since I'd heard good things about it and wanted to try it. It
has worked well for me.
Maybe in a perfect world, Oracle would change licensing for ZFS and it
could be included in the kernel proper, but that seems unlikely at this
point.
We've got a bunch of people to support this proposal; it's
straightforward to reverse if things go badly. It won't affect
upgrades. It doesn't sound like the default layout is going to expose
users to the known risks of BTRFS, and there will definitely be advantages.
I'm in favor of making this change as well.
Thanks,
Marty
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
