On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:18 AM, Christian Schaller <cschalle(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I agree with Matthew here that if we are going with btrfs for the
medium/long term, then
that has an impact on our decision for default filesystem in the short term. To me it
seems like switching to XFS for the workstation doesn't make sense if we still want
get onto btrfs at some point. It just means we will find ourselves with our users
spread across one more filesystem medium/long term.
Right. Workstation gets no benefit from switching to XFS other than
it makes QA happier (for fairly valid reasons). If Server wasn't
switching, this wouldn't even be a conversation. I think we'll likely
just have to stick with ext4 and pitch in on the UI and QA fronts if
that somehow leads to major burden. I expect Server will need to do
the same for the XFS route as well.
The harder question is to what degree we are able to trust in btrfs
within a given timeframe. On the other hand if Suse ships it then
we should at least be able to go to the limited feature version they use at some point.
I think it's something we (the FS and Fedora kernel people) will
really have to keep an eye on. This _are_ improving, so it's a matter
of timeframes really. I'm still hoping to get a talk on it at Flock,
and then reassess for the next Workstation release. In the meantime,
I guess I'll be booting more machines with btrfs to play along.