News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The potential risk to ZFS created by the shift in its userbase. Parent comment

Re:The potential risk to ZFS created by the shift in its use... by vetinari on Monday January 28, 2019 @12:26PM (#19019233)
btrfs has a problem with it's image as being unreliable (some well deserved). Redhat obsoleted it, because they use kernel 3.10 in RHEL7 and they were doing nothing but backporting, without having any btrfs expertise in house anyway. Btrfs continues to be developed by Oracle, Suse, Facebook, Fujitsu and the rest of the usual suspects.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The potential risk to ZFS created by the shift in its use... by walrus01 on Monday January 28, 2019 @01:33PM (#19019823)
RHEL is famous for using kernels that are ancient, even by the notoriously conservative and risk averse debian-stable standards.

I can't even imagine the hassle of backporting stuff from much newer kernels into 3.10 to make btrfs work.

If you want to use btrfs in production (not the best idea, IMHO, but orgs such as facebook do it) you absolutely need to be running a 4.9.x or better kernel.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The potential risk to ZFS created by the shift in its use... by snuxoll on Monday January 28, 2019 @04:19PM (#19021184)
Calling them ancient is a bit unfair, they regularly backport hardware support and select other features from newer kernels. Unlike other distributions, however, they have a stable kernel ABI for an entire release, so they can’t bring in changes that break white listed symbols.
[ Parent | on HN ]