3 ms·

ZFS and EXT4 on LVM have a lot of overlap. A decade or so ago I made a comparison between ZFS, BtrFS, and EXT4 on LVM [0] that may be of interest. [0] https:/

• _emacsomancer_ 7y ago
  The checksumming/error-correction of ZFS is big difference, and the main reason I moved some of my file systems to ZFS (even with versioned backups, on EXT4, I suffered data loss due to corruption/bitrot). On the other hand, for a simple set-up on a lower resource system, EXT4 has lots of advantages.
  • rkeene2 7y ago
    A good, controversial read is available at [0]. I don't agree with his conclusions entirely, but the data he presents is interesting. And also paired with [1] to give space overhead and MTBF figures for various RAID configurations (where RAID-Z ~= RAID5, RAID-Z2 ~= RAID6) [0] https://www.jodybruchon.com/2017/03/07/zfs-wont-save-you-fancy-filesystem-fanatics-need-to-get-a-clue-about-bit-rot-and-raid-5/ https://www.jodybruchon.com/2017/03/07/zfs-wont-save-you-fan... [1] https://rkeene.org/projects/info/wiki/221 https://rkeene.org/projects/info/wiki/221
    • _emacsomancer_ 7y ago
      From experience, as I said, I had bitrot on EXT4, with carefully versioned backups, but it didn't help, since the bitrot was just faithfully propagated through all the backups (I didn't have 5+ year backups - who knows when the bitrot occurred). And I haven't experienced file corruption in the 5+ years I've used ZFS. Of course, ZFS isn't a magic bullet that solves all ills, but I've been very happy with it. I still, of course, have multiple backups of important data, but now I'm more confident about the integrity of those backups.