Linus Torvalds Removes The Bcachefs Code From The Linux Kernel
Linus Torvalds Removes The Bcachefs Code From The Linux Kernel
www.phoronix.com
Linus Torvalds Removes The Bcachefs Code From The Linux Kernel
Comments
68-
-
I’ve never used bcachefs and only recently read about some of the drama. I wish the project the best but at this point it is hard to beat zfs
-
They don't really compete on the same features, but I get what you mean.
-
zfs is confusing as hell for noobs like me. I only really recently learned how to use btrfs. Is there any real reason to use zfs over btrfs on Linux anyway?
-
There are some niche features, but if you're not aware of them then no. It's just licence encumbered btrfs for the majority of us.
-
On top of being confusing, I had my whole proxmox node crash because the ZFS pool randomly crashed out multiple times 🤷♂️
Probably due to the consumer grade nvme I was using it on but... Still why?
Also used a lot of extra ram just to function
-
No unless your doing raid 5 or 6 not there isn't.
-
I have used btrfs exactly once because it was the default on openSUSE, and the filesystem eventually became corrupted and unrecoverable.
-
-
-
Definitely not going anywhere near the comments section on that phoronix article. It's guaranteed to be pure poison.
-
Tbh, what phoronix comment section isn't pure neurological poison?
-
-
Good 👍
-
Why?
-
The developer of bcachefs, Kent Overstreet, has repeatedly failed to abide by the expectations of kernel release schedules, particularly the rc (release candidate) stage, which is supposed to freeze new features until next release.
Kent has open-air arguments with Linus Torvalds about not being able to develop the way he wants to, Linus Torvalds does not like wasting time discussing it with Kent.
IMO, Kent created this situation himself. He'll be happier developing outside upstream anyway.
It should be noted that while some folks have commented that bcachefs was not ready for upstream, several kernel devs have a lot of respect for the technical quality of Kent's work, so I think the argument of whether bcachefs is good or not good is separate from Kent's behaviour as a kernel contributor.
-
It was nowhere close to be mature enough to be in the kernel. The developer is nowhere close to be mature enough to be involved in the kernel. It's better for everybody if it is developed separately and maybe integrated again at a later stage when the file system and tooling are considered stable and changes are smaller and less sensitive. CacheFS being in the kernel might mislead people to rely on a filesystem that is still experimental and under heavy development. Personally I am looking forward to see it mature because I'd love to run it on my file storage home server when it is stable enough.
-
They want you to use Oracle ZFS instead, they have a lot of money riding on this.
-
Seriously?
-
-
-
Kent is such a dumbass. It's a pitty because it's a great filesystem.
Should have never been merged into the kernel lol