Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

But that's more because no one dared to try and actually fix Btrfs parity raid. Misaligned incentives causing lack of funding for something as flexible and generally resilient as Btrfs.


My data doesn't really care if the reason for brtfs losing data is lack of funding


Can you elaborate on this? I see NAS companies like Synology using btrfs in their products. I don't understand why btrfs RAID 5/6 is still not stable.


Synology deploys btrfs on top of md-raid. They do not trust btrfs's raid layer.


Because there are some write holes around iirc power failures and, more importantly, restore basically doesn't work (the code just doesn't exist in a working variant).

This isn't easy code to write, and it's Linux-Kernel-C, far from "comfy" code to write. I assume it's that kind of effect that continues to keep all competent people from fixing Btrfs's RAID 5/6 code. (If I could gather the motivation, I could probably do it, but that's far from fun to do and I'm already dire for motivation-to-code... it needs to be someone who likes that work, ideally sponsored so they don't loose money from working on that project.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: