On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Chris
<xchris89x(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2012/4/25 Josef Bacik <josef(a)toxicpanda.com>:
>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Colin Walters <walters(a)verbum.org>
wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 12:03 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Tomasz Torcz
<tomek(a)pipebreaker.pl> wrote:
>>>> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 01:34:07PM +0200, Matthias Runge wrote:
>>>> >> On 25/04/12 09:48, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>>> >> > +1. I'd like to see this fixed before final.
>>>> >> Yes, me too. Afaik, SuSE supports btrfs even for their
enterprise distro.
>>>> >
>>>> > For added laughs, SLES does not support read-write ext4. Ext4
read-only support
>>>> > is provided for migrating to btrfs.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> That's because Btrfs is way more stable than ext4,
>>>
>>> [citation needed]
>>>
>>
>>
https://twitter.com/#!/josefbacik/status/195190540529184768
>
> Is this a joke? Btrfs more stable than ext4??? Not really???
>
According to the stab-o-matic stability testing framework[1] btrfs
scores a 63 whereas ext4 scores a 37, so yes, I'm completely serious,
And why is Btrfs marked as experimental by upstream?
If it is really more stable than ext4, why does RHEL 6.3 beta not support Btrfs?
I am very surprised...
--
Chris