I have used BTRFS for the first time since March 2023 on my internal archives directory.
Using multiple drives of varying sizes created a luks1 encrypted ‘single’ data and dup meta volume. While I have used btrfs balanced, timeshift and my other develop tool scripts for managing borg backups rely a lot on standard linux file management OS tools. This is where the problem arises. The added complexity re all the btrfs fi or btrfs device commands and so destroys any notion of KISS simplicity.
While a newbie re BTRFS my experience has been lots of wasted time, huge learning curve, lots of wear on my SSDs storing 800 GB of data etc etc.
Am pulling the plug after 1.5 months messing around and I decided to write this to warn others that if you do not have the available time to go through a substantial learning curve, do not touch this and stick with ext2/3/4, xfs, ntfs, vfats which are easy to create, reliable, work well with all the linux OS filesystem management tools and interact well with all the common apps.
In the end BTRFS is still a work in progress and if you have the time to go through the learning curve fine. But for cases such as mine where I was forced out of centos to fedora trying to run a work computer trying to develop other things more important to my time, then for the btrfs filesystem, my recommendation to those, DON’T GO THERE!
My recommendations to the BTRFS developer. Keep It Simple Stupid - KISS! Better fs features does not compensate for complexity of use. Backwards compatibility so it is seamless with ALL apps and linux OS tools is equally important. This is where BTRFS fails and why I regard it as a work of progress for the more adventurous. On this basis I also think it should not be the default filesystem which still should be ext4 particularly for the new and curious.