Btrfs performance improvements on 5.9 kernel

New performance improvements for Btrfs on 5.9 kernel


be careful on this point : repair Btrfs
there is no tools strong enough to repair in all cases

if you use raid with btfrs , use only raid1

I’ve never needed such tools in 10 years, lucky me :wink:

Or Raid0.

On topic: good news! Would be great if btrfs had faster file deletion, because it’s slow a.f.
Some (not all) patches were backported by H. Hoffstätte for 5.8:


other type raids do not returns goods bench a bout speed of one disk no matters you groups in dm.
in this case choose an another fs is better.

I’ve been meaning to try out btrfs but I’ve already reinstalled my system twice the past month and I am too lazy to do it again :joy: Maybe I’ll find an excuse to do it in a few more :slight_smile:

Other filesystems cannot simply add a new device to an existing volume (bar ZFS).
In case of btrfs, it’s just a simple btrfs device add followed by a btrfs balance.

1 Like

I’ve never really had problems with btrfs, only when I was running unreliable hardware that decided to hard lockup every few hours.

Anyone use btrfs for storage? I usually do a btrfs / and Ext4 home with another Ext4 external drive.

I use a single btrfs partition setup on my / drive, with a number of subvolumes like e.g. /home.
My data is on a separate ext4 drive as well.

1 Like

Random question. Are subvolumes kind of like dynamically allocated partitions? Like APFS does using a container disk?

In btrfs-speak, subvolumes are “separately mountable filesystems roots”.
Or as described in the btrfs Wiki: “A Btrfs subvolume can be thought of as a POSIX file namespace”.
In contrast to traditional partitions, subvolumes are not block devices and do not appear in /dev/sdX.
Don’t know it that helps… :slight_smile:

Yes it does! Thanks!

Subvolumes can work as some sort of partitions, in the sense of the term “partitioning”. Sorry, English is not my native language and I don’t find the right words, maybe someone else could step in?