I've been using btrfs for maybe 10 years now? -- on a single Linux home NAS. I use it in a raid1c3 config (I used to do c2). raid1cN is mirroring with N copies. I have compression on. I use snapshots rarely.

I've had a few issues, but no data loss:

* Early versions of btrfs had an issue where you'd run out of metadata space (if I recall). You had to rebalance and sometimes add some temporary space do that.

* One of my filesystems wasn't optimally aligned because btrfs didn't do that automatically (or something like that -- this was a long time ago.) A very very minor issue.

* Corruption (but no data loss, so I'm not sure it's corruption per se...) during a device replacement.

This last one caused no data loss, but a lot of error messages. I started a logical device removal, removed the device physically, rebooted, and then accidentally readded the physical device while it was still removing it logically. It was not happy. I physically removed the device again, finished the logical remove, and did a scrub and the fsck equivalent. No errors.

I think that's a testament to its resiliency, but also a testament how you can shoot yourself in the foot.

I've never used RAID5/6 on btrfs and don't plan to -- partly because of the scary words around it, but I also assume the rebuild time is longer.

Funny to hear your success; I've managed to break almost every mirror I've entrusted to BTRFS! How? Holding down the power button!

Seemingly regardless of the drives, interface, or kernel, other filesystems paired with LVM or mdraid fail/recover/lie more gracefully. NVMe or SATA (spindles). Demonstrated back-to-back with replacements from different batches.

Truly disheartening, I want BTRFS. I would like to dedicate some time to this, but, well, time remains of the essence. I'm hoping it's something boring like my luck with boards/storage controllers, /shrug.

Well, what are you waiting for? Get your findings to the btrfs-devel mailing list, include your drive make and model. Even better if it's reproducable.

TLDR: busy, lazy, not properly incentivized. I'll get right on that, boss... or is it Officer? I already said: time. I'd like to spend more of my time with triage before I disrupt others, particularly the developers. I don't mind y'all so much :)

It's reproducible, the scope needs to be reduced. With work. A lot of testing and variable change/reduction. More than I care for.

The problem: R&R, work/money, etc, all compete for a limited amount of time. I'll spend it how I like, Square? Comments win over rigorous testing with my schedule, thanks.

Why don't you try to reproduce it? Better things to do, this isn't the mailing list? Exactly. Pick a reason, there's plenty.

btrfs is good, but it's far from perfect. RAID 5 and 6 don't exactly work, it can have problems at high snapshot counts, and there's lots of even recent reports of corruption and other kinds of filesystem damage.

It feels more user friendly than ZFS, but ZFS is much more feature complete. I used to use btrfs for all my personal stuff, but honestly ext4 is just easier.