<...>but what would be Veeam without any supported Filesystems/Distros?! Right, nothing than a piece of software which cannot be used.
I'd rather not have to deal with reductio ad absurdum
on this forum, please.
Veeam supports the majority of popular and proven file systems that are available in most distros out of the box. That's why the argument about what Veeam would be is not entirely true. We, as a company, choose to support a particular set of technologies, based on users' feedback, our own findings and analysis, and we chose to do things properly. Sure, we could attempt to support literally everything and believe me, we really would love to do that, but given the amount of resources, current priorities we need to make a choice what should be supported in the first place, and what should be supported later.
If Veeam's development process is not that dynamic - then please do not proclaim a distro which does use Btrfs by default as fully supported! That's nothing than confusing.
If BTRFS was mandatory, or crucial, or essential, or, at least, obviously beneficial for SLES users, then I would agree. However it is only "by default" for some reason and it didn't seem to be very popular among our customers two years ago when Veeam Backup for Linux project has started.
Let me refer to the release notes of SUSE SLES 12 from April 2014! Yes you read correct - more than 4 years ago!
3.4.4 Default File System
With SUSE Linux Enterprise 12, the default file system in new installations was changed from Ext3 to Btrfs for the root system partition.
Do you wanna say 4 years (let's ignore the time in which Btrfs has been available linux kernel 2.6.29+) are too short for Veeam to get a feature implemented in its software?
What I want to say is
1. There was no Veeam Agent for Linux 4 years ago
2. There was no significant demand on BTRFS, while there was plenty of other stable and popular file systems to support, and that's exactly what we were busy with the whole time
3. Again, the file system was not quite stable back in days. As official BTRFS wiki directly says
<...>Earlier versions may fail to list subvolumes when cleaner process is operating, and this could cause random failures during backup. That said, many fixes have gone in btrfs send/receive and it is recommended to use at least a 3.14, or 3.15 kernel to have later patches.<...>
SLES got its kernel climb higher than 3.12 only in SLES 12 SP2 (November 2016
). There is no point supporting something that is changing its crucial internals on the fly.
Don't get me wrong - Veeam is doing a great job regarding the protection of virtual environments - but considering the Btrfs support, Veeam completely failed!
Can you please clarify what exactly Veeam failed? Don't get me wrong, I really want and support the idea of having BTRFS supported as soon as possible, that's why the priority of this feature is high. On the other hand, I may understand your frustration on not having his supported yet, but keep in mind that the file system's completness and production readiness are still questionable and the file system itself is not that common yet.