Questions about OS 6

mdgm wrote:

This has been discussed here: https://www.facebook.com/AllAboutReadyNAS/posts/171244913026833 ReadyNAS wrote: BTRFS is part of the SUSE and Oracle's production linux distributions. Here is just one article showing BTRFS is ready for production. https://www.linux.com/news/enterprise/s ... dy-to-rock Link to Oracle's Unbreakable Linux Kernal release information including the inclusion of BTRFS. http://www.oracle.com/us/technologies/l ... 555063.pdf

That's no argument! That it's included in the kernel in some distributions is completely irrelevant (it's been in the mainline since 2009). The point is that BTRFS is very much in a state of development. If you check patches and bugs popping up RIGHT NOW, it's obvious that BTRFS is a bleeding-edge choice. RAID5/6 support was dragged into the codebase THIS FEBRUARY for Pete's sake! (announcement: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.fil ... trfs/23006 where the main developer calls this "experimental"). Now, of course NTGR is probably running BTRFS on top of a MDRAID (X-raid2) instead of native BTRFS RAID, but in that case there are even fewer reasons to choose a bleeding-edge file system. Or, at least, you are not even going for performance. You just get features, perhaps even with less performance. And the only really valuable end-user feature is the snapshots.

Why in the world would I entrust my data to experimental file systems? These devices are meant to be rock solid and store data securely, yet there are documented problems right now. I'm sure NTGR could make a reeeaaally convincing facebook-argument for Reiser4 too, but until we see what happens to early adopters, I won't be buying more NTGR storage products and won't be recommending them to anyone. Synology are miles ahead for consumers (which means ARM-based devices) anyway.

Some very strange decisions from NTGR lately. Unproven file system, dropping support for old devices. When you try to leapfrog the competition, don't jump too far ahead of your customers.