It definitely did. btrfs might have been ready years ago otherwise, but instead... it languishes like a sad joke in comparison to ZFS. The biggest problem btrf

It definitely did. btrfs might have been ready years ago otherwise, but instead... it languishes like a sad joke in comparison to ZFS. The biggest problem btrfs has, really, is the user interface. Nothing is as easy to use as the zfs command! This is still a pretty good summary of the differences: https://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-software/ways-in-which-zfs-is-better-than-btrfs https://rudd-o.com/linux-and-free-software/ways-in-which-zfs... The only part that's outdated now is that btrfs finally has raid5/6 support... kind of. It's still marked experimental and shouldn't be trusted for production data. Mind, btrfs does have one advantage: online shrink support providing much better resizing capabilities for its pools. This has always been on the backburner of ZFS; Sun once had a very slow implementation back around 2005-2006, but the Oracle acquisition pretty much killed any planned work on that front and I think most users of ZFS likewise don't consider it a high priority either. Even for the case of btrfs... it only works great when it's in the mood to. It's a bit easy to get into situations where it will absolutely refuse to remove devices despite there being plenty of space for it.