Not a tech support question, I’m just curious. I recently installed it. Everything is working great, feels like I got a whole new laptop compared to my previous setup. I haven’t tried out any of btrfs’s unique features, so I dunno, nothing special I can report about it. Coming from Debian I was just surprized by how different Fedoras installer defaults are. Do you agree with btrfs being a default option?

  • qweertz (they/she)@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    On Fedora, Btrfs has been the default for years now iirc. It’s modern and rock solid too (as long as you avoid Raid 5/6) and has some features I can’t live without nowadays:

    • Copy-on-write (prevents file duplication)
    • Snapshots (your systems broke? most easy rollback you will ever experience is with Btrfs in combination with Timeshift)
    • on-the-fly compression (I’d recommend “–compression-force=zstd:3” as a mount option. Last I checked Fedora defaulted to using the lowest compression level, which is not the Btrfs default, making you lose some gains. FYI about the “force”: btrfs by default checks whether a file is compressible or not, this is redundant with zstd, which does the same thing but quite a bit faster AFAIK)