5 ms·
ZFS is more stable, but the architecture it forces you into is IMO far from ideal in many cases. I've played with BTRFS (in RAID-1 mode) instead of ZFS because
by Kadin 10y ago
ZFS is more stable, but the architecture it forces you into is IMO far from ideal in many cases.
I've played with BTRFS (in RAID-1 mode) instead of ZFS because of the latter's limitations about adding drives. With BTRFS, you can drop in a new drive at any time and rebalance. This is how things ought to work. ZFS's concept of VDEVs might make sense for huge corporate storage arrays, but they're just a pain if you're running a small server or NAS, where growing the array drive-by-drive is a very common scenario.
Due to the complexity of dealing with VDEVs, I've personally never seen much use for ZFS on Linux vs. just biting the bullet and dealing with LVM over mdadm. BTRFS is the closest thing to a compelling argument to moving away from that setup I've seen on Linux.
- alyandon 10y agoThat and being able to trivially resize/reshape BTRFS storage volumes after adding/removing devices makes it more suitable for my personal home use.