Btrfs is a great filesystem for proxmox in raid 1. Stop telling people not to use it
Btrfs is a great filesystem for proxmox in raid 1. Stop telling people not to use it
Btrfs gets a bad rap sometimes but I have been using it for years and it works very well. It is able to take failing hardware and power outages and still has good performance.
Agreed, I switched over from OpenZFS to btrfs and while it does lack some more advanced features, using btrfs for raid1 disk pools has been a very solid and hassle free experience.
Yes BTRFS is really good and solid. Usually survives hardware failure much better than the EXT* crap. And sub volumes and snapshots, damn finally a modern filesystem.
To be honest, I don't see a benefit for btrfs (or zfs). I prefer plain ext4 (no LVM). It's simpler and faster. I have no need for snapshots. Proxmox handles my vms and my working machines are just a collection of dot files... But that's just me. It's good that there are choices.
Ext4 is slower than btrfs
It's been a while since I looked at benchmarks (https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-5.14-File-Systems). It could be these days.
I've used Proxmox in the past w it, worked okie. One crazy hypervisor, ton of features. I mostly stick w VMware, it just works. My uptime is measured in years.
Well I'll never get a uptime like they in proxmox cause I update.
You can do the same thing with proxmox.
The benefit of proxmox is that it is libre and uses Linux components.
It has been a while since I looked at it but does proxmox support HA replication using btrfs? From what I remember only zfs worked with those features.
I don't know as I don't use that feature
My anecdotal experience with btrfs is that it constantly broke in raid 1, no problems with any other filesystems on the exact same hardware and setup. YMMV
Its supposed to be called betterFS but Jim Salter keeps calling it butter FS. Doesn't really inspire confidence. At least it's gonna need.. a better name