# BTRFS deprecated in Redhat



## usdmatt (Aug 2, 2017)

Looks like Redhat have stopped any further updates to BTRFS and will be removing it in the next major version.

https://access.redhat.com/documenta...4_Release_Notes-Deprecated_Functionality.html

Not that I think this is an indication of the future of BTRFS in general, but it's surprising to see a major distros decide they are going to get rid of it completely.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 2, 2017)

It was never a fully supported feature to begin with.



> The Btrfs file system has been in Technology Preview state since the initial release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. Red Hat will not be moving Btrfs to a fully supported feature and it will be removed in a future major release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 2, 2017)

I wonder if this is a sign for a new Red Hat File System.


----------



## usdmatt (Aug 2, 2017)

> It was never a fully supported feature to begin with.



Well no, but I assume the original plan was for it to eventually be considered stable and become a supported feature, not just stay as a preview then get dropped..



> I wonder if this is a sign for a new Red Hat File System.



I did see some comments about a RedHat filesystem although I took them as random speculation, developing a file system is a massive undertaking. It's interesting though as RedHat now doesn't have any "next gen" file system. I've never used XFS (their default) so I don't know what it's like but I'd be lost these days without my ZFS checksums, snapshots and send/recv.


----------



## Cthulhux (Aug 2, 2017)

usdmatt said:


> I've never used XFS (their default) so I don't know what it's like but I'd be lost these days without my ZFS checksums, snapshots and send/recv.



XFS would probably not be for you then.


----------



## SirDice (Aug 2, 2017)

usdmatt said:


> Well no, but I assume the original plan was for it to eventually be considered stable and become a supported feature, not just stay as a preview then get dropped..


Nah, it was just an experimental feature they added because of user requests. Then, after testing it and getting feedback for a couple of versions, decided it wasn't worth it and dropped it. 



> Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 includes Btrfs as a technology preview to allow you to experiment with this file system. You should not choose Btrfs for partitions that will contain valuable data or that are essential for the operation of important systems.


https://access.redhat.com/documenta...Linux/6/html/6.1_Technical_Notes/ar01s03.html


----------



## usdmatt (Aug 2, 2017)

Yeah I did have a quick look at the XFS features. The big downside of ZFS and similar file systems is it's big/complicated and often slower than other file systems on the same hardware. I expect XFS is probably good performance wise and likely a good choice for general servers, especially kit with enterprise hardware RAID (which is what a lot of RedHat installs are probably running on ).

For my uses though, the ability to instantly keep/access previous days/weeks data, and have my several hour rsync backups replaced with several minute zfs sends has completely changed how I store and manage user data.

I did work with snapshot backups on Linux years ago using LVM but it was a PITA compared to ZFS.


----------



## ralphbsz (Aug 3, 2017)

While BtrFS has some genius in it, the implementation has always been shaky.  I refer to it as "a machine for losing data".

XFS, on the other hand, seems to be solid.  Perhaps old-fashioned (it is, after all, 20 years old now), but well engineered.  No wonder, it was done by real professionals at a real computer company.  In my experience, it has good performance (for a single-node single-disk file system), due to its extent-based allocation.


----------

