ext4 or btrfs on Synology

[Blue-Vision]

  On 31/12/2017 at 01:02, dyn said:

That isn't what they are saying at all. Synology isn't using the RAID functionality of BTRFS since it has issues and isn't production ready (as the official BTRFS wiki is telling the rest of the world). It is this RAID functionality that people mean when they are saying that RADI5/6 with BTRFS gives issues (read: data corruption).

Expand  

That's what I said ... o.O

[Mindovermaster Global Moderator]

  On 31/12/2017 at 01:32, Unobscured Vision said:

That's what I said ... o.O

Expand  

I was about to say that, but I bit my tongue...

[nekrosoft13]

  On 13/09/2016 at 02:24, BudMan said:

So 1 idiot on youtube??  without even 5k views?  Over a year ago..  So that was posted Apr 2015, so that was what version at best 3.19.1?  Maybe 4?

 

https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Changelog

 

So we are now version 4.7.2, think maybe a few improvements?

 

So synology has now made it their default??  Do you think that would be a wise choice for a company that makes nas's for their bread and butter if their was even a slight chance it could flake out and wipe all their users data??  Does that sound plausible??  Mindovermatter was their red flashing lights, bells going off warning warning warning you could loose data using this??

Expand  

you know one idiot on youtube is smarter then entire company that builds nas devices these days.

[Ryster]

  On 12/12/2017 at 00:45, Unobscured Vision said:

No. Use ext3/4 (Linux raid). Far more stable. That's what Synology was saying. Btrfs RAID isn't supported at all due to data corruption issues.

Expand  

 

[Blue-Vision]

Yeah, it's even Synology saying it. At least until issues are worked out.

[+BudMan MVC]

dude that idiot on youtube was saying the File system was BAD and unstable - not raid portion of it was the bad part..

 

Lets be clear on what is being talked about..   The OP from over from over a year ago btw.. Asked what file system they should use, not if they should use linux raid or btrfs raid, etc..

 

Unobscured vision doesn't seem to be able to tell the difference..

[dyn]

  On 31/12/2017 at 01:32, Unobscured Vision said:

That's what I said ... o.O

Expand  

No, that's what you think you said, in reality you mixed up the terminology and made incorrect claims like:

1. ext3/4 are Linux RAID while in fact they are not; they are only filesystems, Linux RAID is an entirely separate thing.
2. BTRFS and any kind of RAID is unsafe while in fact it is not; it is only the in-built RAID functionality of BTRFS that is unsafe.
3. Synology saying you should not use BTRFS; they are not and they are even actively using it in DSM.

Be careful with the terminology you use since you have made a somewhat confusing issue even more confusing to others.

 

Meanwhile, they already submitted an RFC patch on 1 aug 2017: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID56 And yes, this only seems to apply to RAID levels that use parity (such as 5 and 6 but not 0, 1 or 10).

 

Btw, for those who didn't know: SUSE has been using BTRFS as their default filesystem in their OpenSUSE versions as well as their enterprise versions for some time now. Synology isn't the only one so it seems that BTRFS itself is considered production-ready (just not their RAID functionality). 

 

[Blue-Vision]

We're still on about this?? Really?

 

Ugh.