this post was submitted on 15 Jul 2024
369 points (96.5% liked)
linuxmemes
21160 readers
1352 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
2. Be civil
- Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
- Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
- Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
- Bigotry will not be tolerated.
- These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
3. Post Linux-related content
- Including Unix and BSD.
- Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of
sudo
in Windows.
- No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
4. No recent reposts
- Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I've been burned by btrfs before. Never again. It's not a good file system, especially for multi disk systems.
Idk about all that, it's been fine for me, just a little misconfiguration here. The compression just saved me a bunch of storage space, so I'm kinda in btrfs' corner right now lol
It was fine for me too, right up to the point that it really wasn't.
I've had two production systems fail because btrfs didn't balance metadata and file space like it says it will. It has some fancy features, but do you need them?