No, I don&#x27;t think so.  I&#x27;m a small-time admin, and I think that btrfs is working pretty good these days.<p>We have recently switched all our servers to LXC containers so that we can take full advantage of btrfs features.<p>I doubt I need to explain the advantages of containers to anyone here... but in short we&#x27;ve broken out all the network services (file service, LDAP, DNS, etc.) to separate containers.<p>Each container is in a separate btrfs subvolume.  This allows us to take snapshots of the running systems every 10 minutes, and using btrfs send&#x2F;receive, cheaply back up those snapshots to alternate container hosts.  The send&#x2F;receive stuff works better with the btrfs v4.4 tools that ship with Ubuntu 16.04.<p>Since the network interfaces for all the containers are bridged with the container host, we can configure each container with its own static IP address.  So if a container host fails, those containers can be booted up on the alternate host, and keep their IP and MAC addresses.  So that&#x27;s convenient, and causes minimal disruption.<p>The main improvement I&#x27;d like to see with btrfs is a configurable RAID redundancy level.  Currently, RAID-1 means that there are two copies of each piece of data &#x2F; metadata.  So in a 3-drive RAID-1 system that gives you extra capacity, but two drives failing at the same time will cause data loss.