Should have never been merged into the kernel lol
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
205 points (98.6% liked)
Linux
58903 readers
626 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I’ve never used bcachefs and only recently read about some of the drama. I wish the project the best but at this point it is hard to beat zfs
They don't really compete on the same features, but I get what you mean.
zfs is confusing as hell for noobs like me. I only really recently learned how to use btrfs. Is there any real reason to use zfs over btrfs on Linux anyway?
There are some niche features, but if you're not aware of them then no. It's just licence encumbered btrfs for the majority of us.
On top of being confusing, I had my whole proxmox node crash because the ZFS pool randomly crashed out multiple times 🤷♂️
Probably due to the consumer grade nvme I was using it on but... Still why?
Also used a lot of extra ram just to function
I think it's just hardware optimization. You get a ton more pain and risk replacing a drive in zfs vs raid10, but it's more space efficient and flexible to use zfs. This is all academic, because the goal of these systems is a certain level of performance, availability, and data integrity, but not data safety. You need backups (preferably off-site and even off line) backups for that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I have used btrfs exactly once because it was the default on openSUSE, and the filesystem eventually became corrupted and unrecoverable.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Definitely not going anywhere near the comments section on that phoronix article. It's guaranteed to be pure poison.
Tbh, what phoronix comment section isn't pure neurological poison?
Good 👍
Why?
The developer of bcachefs, Kent Overstreet, has repeatedly failed to abide by the expectations of kernel release schedules, particularly the rc (release candidate) stage, which is supposed to freeze new features until next release.
Kent has open-air arguments with Linus Torvalds about not being able to develop the way he wants to, Linus Torvalds does not like wasting time discussing it with Kent.
IMO, Kent created this situation himself. He'll be happier developing outside upstream anyway.
It should be noted that while some folks have commented that bcachefs was not ready for upstream, several kernel devs have a lot of respect for the technical quality of Kent's work, so I think the argument of whether bcachefs is good or not good is separate from Kent's behaviour as a kernel contributor.
Additionally, Kent got most of his kernel changes needed for bcachefs merged already, so a dkms should be easier to manage now.
So if I’m reading this correctly, the program can operate fine as an external module because the kernel itself supports it well with those changes?
To be more clear, before he got his code mainlined, you needed to run h8s full fork of the kernel, with changes made not just to the cache code itself, but also to other parts.
Not all of his changes went in though; but the differences got sorted out enough that the vast majority of his newer changes were driver only.
That said, he was still ruffling feathers about wanting some fast moving kernel changes.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It was nowhere close to be mature enough to be in the kernel. The developer is nowhere close to be mature enough to be involved in the kernel. It's better for everybody if it is developed separately and maybe integrated again at a later stage when the file system and tooling are considered stable and changes are smaller and less sensitive. CacheFS being in the kernel might mislead people to rely on a filesystem that is still experimental and under heavy development. Personally I am looking forward to see it mature because I'd love to run it on my file storage home server when it is stable enough.
It was nowhere close to be mature enough to be in the kernel. The developer is nowhere close to be mature enough to be involved in the kernel
what independently verifiable condition(s) will satisfy these requirements?
That the developer himself finds it absolutely necessary to push new code outside the window for upcoming versions of the kernel is a pretty good indication.
That is a personality issue, not a code emergency.
There were two dozen patches submitted for 6.17 that were never merged. What has the fall-out been? Where are all the stories about data loss? I am sure they would hit the front page.
The file system can improve but it is already fine.
The fallout for people knowingly risking their data beta testing a filesystem that is still in experimental and some users running into issues and possibly corruption?
There are no stories because it is not a story when a test environment for finding bugs fails and the bugs get fixed. Nobody with data they can not lose are putting it on bcachefs because why would they.
Thanks for running a test environment though. Please take backups of anything important, just in case.
That is a personality issue, not a code emergency.
True, but it is an indication that the developer cannot follow a common rules. Simply Torvalds was tired of how he behaved.
There were two dozen patches submitted for 6.17 that were never merged. What has the fall-out been? Where are all the stories about data loss? I am sure they would hit the front page.
And so ? A patch can be submitted but never merged, for whatever reason. Problem is: these two dozen patches were submitted during the -RC cycle ?
The file system can improve but it is already fine.
Good. Now it it the developer that need to improve his attitude to work in teams.
I have been relying on the filesystem. It is excellent. It is mature enough.
Sadly, the lead dev for bcachefs is not mature enough.
I agree, on both statements.
It is easily stable enough for experimental use.
Not really why op said, though. It's stable enough for ~~exeprimental~~ use
It's marked as experimental, hence the "experimental"
load more comments
(34 replies)
Kent is such a dumbass. It's a pitty because it's a great filesystem.
view more: next ›