I was wondering if anyone here has attempted the new “COW filesystem for Linux that won’t eat your data”.
It’s supposedly has been stable since the start of 2023. I’m willing to give it a try on Arch, but before I do, I’d like to hear if anyone has faced any issues with it.
I want to try it, but I’m definitely gonna wait a while first.
How long do you think?
Until you start seeing its reviews. Or else, you should try using it for data you can afford to lose (unimportant or backed up) - which is what reviewers would be doing anyway.
Probably somewhere between kernel 6.8 and Fedora making it default (that’s broad I know). I’m guessing around kernel 7.
I’m itching to try it, but haven’t had a chance, yet. I wouldn’t immediately jump a production load onto it, but on a homelab? Should be perfectly fine.
I’m looking forward to try it myself… and also wondering if I’ll ever be able to read it as b-cache-fs rather than bca-chefs.
Hmm… “baka-chefs”. Rolls off the tongue. Thanks for sharing!
I am unfamiliar with this filesystem, and am curious about it. Could someone explain to me its benefits over btrfs?
From what I understand:
- it has all btrfs features
- it’s as performant as ext4 (with COW enabled)
- it’s more stable than btrfs
- it has built-in encryption, (no LUKS needed)
It’s still missing the send and receive features from btrfs. And while they say it’s more stable than btrfs, it’s yet to prove itself (through widespread use), and is marked as experimental in the kernel config.
I recall snapshots not being quite as cheap as on ZFS.
Is there an article I can refer to? This isn’t an easy topic to search for.
I heard good things about bcachefs, it’s quite new I’d wait a few years before giving it a try; ideally until every major distro support it.
I’m currently using Btrfs and Luks, I didn’t have any issue so far.
