Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Is it really going to be that huge? I'm using btrfs, how is bcachefs better?
It has most of the major features of BTRFS + tiered storage + per file/directory redundancy + native encryption support. It also seems to be architectured in a way that avoids the write-hole issue for RAID 5/6 that BTRFS has and therefore once that feature is added, it won't be as likely to eat your data. It also had a better system for handling different sized drives.
Overall, it seems like a redesigned BTRFS with the experience of bcache development and benefit of hindsight avoiding some of the early pitfalls that BTRFS had. It already seems like the ideal filesystem that does it all for single systems. Especially if Kent gets the backing he needs to fill out the rest of the roadmap, I really don't see what other filesystems have to offer that are worth losing the other benefits.
Maybe I'm wrong and it will stall or something, but it has been almost a decade already and there have been steady improvements throughout. I plan to switch to it as soon as I can get it working. It is still a bit rough getting a proper multi-drive encrypted system booting since it is still early days of mainline support and disros don't have very good support for it yet.
Thanks man(?), nice insight.