[mythtv-users] Is Btrfs a good choice for MythTV?

[John P Poet]

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:49 PM, belcampo <belcampo at zonnet.nl> wrote:
> On 05/20/11 22:39, John P Poet wrote:
>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:40 PM, John Drescher<drescherjm at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Richard Shaw<hobbes1069 at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>> I'm asking the question from a technical features and not from a "is
>>>> it ready for prime time?" standpoint.
>>>>
>>>> The only Myth link I could find is:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/Btrfs
>>>>
>>>> Which is really a stub and doesn't go over and pro's or con's.
>>>>
>>>> It's getting pretty stable and unless there's a bad bug the filesystem
>>>> format/structure is fixed and only forward compatible changes will be
>>>> accepted. There's also limited fsck'ing although there's no link to
>>>> fsck.btrfs yet (a least in Fedora).
>>>>
>>>> The current plan is to make it the default filesystem for Fedora 16
>>>> (about 6 months from now) so the devs must have some confidence in it
>>>> at this point.
>>>
>>> I would say not at this time. The utility tools are no where near
>>> complete and the format has changed several times. I would currently
>>> use zfs over btrfs. Ext4 over both of these.
>>
>> Does ext4 have a defrag tool now?
>>
>> I have a couple of very large storage groups for the video files, and
>> it can get pretty fragmented.  I keep it under control with xfs'
>> xfs_fsr tool
> You could keep that down by specifying allocsize=1024M as mount option,
> then you'll endup with almost no fragmentation at all.

I used to have that option, but it isn't there now....  I must have
forgotten to re-add it the last time I did a full OS install.

Thanks for the reminder.


John
-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?