I think it depends on who you ask. Facebook and Netflix are using it extensively in production:
https://www.linux.com/news/learn/intro-to-linux/how-facebook-uses-linux-and-...
Though they have the in-house kernel engineering resources to troubleshoot problems. When I see quotes like this [1] on the product's WIKI:
"The parity RAID code has multiple serious data-loss bugs in it. It should not be used for anything other than testing purposes."
I'm reluctant to store anything of value on it. Have you considered using ZoL? I've been using it for quite some time and haven't lost data.
- Ryan http://prefetch.net
[1] https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/RAID56
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Mark Haney mark.haney@neonova.net wrote:
On 09/07/2017 01:57 PM, hw wrote:
Hi,
is there anything that speaks against putting a cyrus mail spool onto a btrfs subvolume?
I might be the lone voice on this, but I refuse to use btrfs for anything, much less a mail spool. I used it in production on DB and Web servers and fought corruption issues and scrubs hanging the system more times than I can count. (This was within the last 24 months.) I was told by certain mailing lists, that btrfs isn't considered production level. So, I scrapped the lot, went to xfs and haven't had a problem since.
I'm not sure why you'd want your mail spool on a filesystem and seems to hate being hammered with reads/writes. Personally, on all my mail spools, I use XFS or EXT4. OUr servers here handle 600million messages a month without trouble on those filesystems.
Just my $0.02.
Mark Haney Network Engineer at NeoNova 919-460-3330 option 1 mark.haney@neonova.net www.neonova.net
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos