Well, a few years ago, BTRFS was nowhere near as stable and supported as it is now, so I don’t doubt that.
Still doesn’t hurt to have one installed though, just in case.
3 Likes
That’s definitely true. It’s some 200 MiB of storage space. If you can’t afford that for a backup kernel, well, then you’ve got much bigger problems than your system breaking on updates.
@arch_lover try booting into an LTS kernel and running it for a few days. If you don’t notice any degradation in performance, consider staying on it. Keep the mainline kernel installed, of course.
Personally, unless I play games using wine, I typically notice no difference in performance between different kernel versions. I do notice performance increase in certain games with the Zen kernel and custom Proton builds that use Fsync, but that’s pretty much the only situation. And since switching between different kernels is only a matter of rebooting, there is no reason not to have multiple installed.
2 Likes
Okay but I am curious. Why are you suggesting this approach ?
Wait til they start injecting rust code into it the kernel, which I think will start happening relatively soon. Don’t know how you effectively manage a multi language code base that large and that low level.
Yup, resembling a larger and larger ball of increasingly tangled fishing line.
2 Likes
If you notice no difference then you are making your life potentially much easier.
1 Like
Okay what about I keep using the mainline kernel & boot using the LTS kernel only if the mainline kernel is causing trouble ?
If you boot the LTS kernel, you are then not using the mainline kernel. 
You can have multiple kernels installed, they do not interfere with each other (as long as they are from the repos, of course). Whichever one you boot is the one you’re currently using.
If you forget which kernel you’re using, just run:
uname -a
kernel breakages are extremely common in the early days of a brand new kernel. Since Arch has very little time delay before new kernels are pushed out of testing, it is common for issues to occur with a percentage of users. On LTS, you don’t get new kernels every few months so stability will be better.
1 Like
I have been using btrfs for the last 7-8 years and I have seen no material change in stability. It is and probably always will be just a short time away from achieving true stability.
1 Like
@Kresimir @dalto
Yes I understood that part that kernel breakages are common in early days. What I am asking is why not test/use new kernels & “if” there’s a problem I can easily reboot & use the LTS kernel which is already installed.
I’ve never used anything other than ext3 and ext4, so anything I say about btrfs is unreliable. 
It works, I’m happy with it, I understand it well enough and I don’t particularly desire the fancy features of btrfs.
1 Like
Any year now.
Is George RR Martin coding btrfs?
3 Likes
Because the current thread of the topic was about stability 
If you want to test new things and don’t mind dealing with breakages then by all means, using bleeding edge kernels.
Can’t wait until we can play Half-Life 3 on a GNU/Hurd computer using btrfs, wayland and pipewire.
3 Likes
Current ETA: Year 2387
2 Likes
Understood. Thanks.
1 Like
Just don’t get the impression that the mainline kernel breaks all the time. I still think it is fairly stable, at least on Arch stable branch.
But LTS is definitely a safer option, especially if you’re worried about stability, don’t mind having the latest features, and especially if you do not notice significant difference in performance. There is no reason not to use it, or at least keep it installed as a fallback.
That’s my logic at least, my default is LTS, and if I need something else, I reboot with mainline or Zen.
GNU Hurd… 
I am no longer worried about this coz with your help I have the LTS kernel as backup.
For me Mainline kernel = daily use & LTS= In case of emergency…