Butter fuss

>butter fuss

Attached: 1517428182237.png (1639x1045, 27K)

>data gone

You sure about that? i've been using it on all my computers since August and i got no problems.

Sure enough that after the data loss I've experienced I don't want to touch it again.

bcachefs when?

It's pretty great if you want snapshots. openSUSE sets it up real nice and you can just boot into a snapshot and revert shit back if you mess up something.

bee tree eff ess is absolutely based for laptops. copy on write is godly when you push your battery to death on an almost daily limit

had btrfs fail on me before, rendering my OpenSUSE system unbootable.
I'll never use btrfs again. It shouldn't be the default on any distribution. Considering I only used btrfs for a few months, it's quite telling when it breaks so early.

I've used ext3 and ext4 for as long as I have used Linux (9+ years) and it hasn't failed me a single time yet.

>butter fuss
more like
>bugger fuss

I've never had issues and I've used it for years. But yeah it is not known to be as stable as ext

I've been using it for over 4 years and it's been fine.

>scuzzy

Attached: Hdd-wscsi.jpg (1280x1000, 86K)

Used it for RAID6 and it ate all my data.

I use btrfs on a server that runs docker containers and it's never had a problem. Btrfs had some serious problems early on but these days it's pretty stable if you don't push it to it's limits. The biggest problem I have with btrfs is that snapshots & subvolumes are not performant when used heavily. When Btrfs was new, I had it cause crashes on a desktop but those sort of problems are long gone

Linux :DDD
Nothing beats NTFS hehe
Ameriggan Freedom xDDD

Attached: bear.jpg (800x450, 48K)

what does zfs/btrfs offer over mdadm+lvm+ext4/xfs -- why would I use zfs/btrfs if my current setup already does raid/logical disks/snapshotting/cow?

this but unironically

NTFS just works. if errors ever occur, and you probably have to use broken hardware to have that happen, chkdsk can usually fix them.

fragmentation is a non-issue and can easily be resolved with an automated maintenance task, not requiring any active shenanigans from the file system when trying to write a file (which will not 100% prevent fragmentation anyway, only reduce chance for it, unless it refuses to write files when it can't not fragment them)

I use it on my storage drive for the automatic compression and deduplication. The whole filesystem and metadata is checksummed so I hope that means it will automatically heal any corruption that might happen

When I was new to Linux I used to use NTFS because I didn't understand or could be bothered dealing with permissions. Now I can't live without the features of Linux filesystems.

Sure is

> bitter fish

>I used to use NTFS because I didn't understand or could be bothered dealing with permissions
NTFS has permissions though, through ACL. Which I find it better than "RWX for user/group/other" that Linux uses

Linux also has ACLs mate

only in certain raid configurations.

been using btrfs since 2013 with no data loss.

this, but since last May

This but quite unironically too, the instant metadata search is nice