I've got two cents' worth on this topic, as I have been running a 2-drive btrfs filesystem for almost 2 years now. First, you need to understand that btrfs was really designed with massive storage in mind -- on a single-drive personal computer it offers just about zero benefits (depending ... snapshots and COW might benefit some situations, and you can't do that with ext4). So, there's little reason for a non-RAID, single user system to prefer btrfs over ext4. I don't know why you would prefer it for the OS filesystem, for example -- my OS is on ext4, tuned for the SSD that holds it. I put my btrfs filesystem on a pair of WD1002FAEX drives, connected to a 6G/s SATA port, and used the default configuration (striped data, mirrored metadata). When compression became available, I enabled that. I have about 750GB of data on that system, which has been doing fine since December of 2010.
Code:
root@imerabox:/home/don# btrfs fi df /mnt/DATA Data, RAID0: total=966.00GB, used=771.86GB Data: total=8.00MB, used=0.00 System, RAID1: total=8.00MB, used=84.00KB System: total=4.00MB, used=0.00 Metadata, RAID1: total=37.62GB, used=1.56GB Metadata: total=8.00MB, used=0.00
Code:
root@imerabox:/home/don# btrfs scrub status /mnt/DATA scrub status for c112ed57-0e33-4d4b-82c9-5c55932c529d scrub started at Thu Sep 6 13:49:07 2012 and finished after 3742 seconds total bytes scrubbed: 774.98GB with 0 errors
Comment