3 ms·
> well the commands are terrible compared to ZFS Really? I don’t think so, I find btrfs usage extremely straightforward and easy to grok. ZFS on the other hand
by gpanders 6y ago
> well the commands are terrible compared to ZFS
Really? I don’t think so, I find btrfs usage extremely straightforward and easy to grok. ZFS on the other hand has all that confusing lingo about vdevs, etc...
I get that this is subjective but I disagree.
- nix23 6y agoHey everyone has a different taste, but vdevs, datasets, and pool are for me much more logical than lv's and lg's (pun was NOT intended).
- zeropoint46 6y agobut thats not really btrfs, thats LVM. I use BTRFS directly on physical disks and dont use pvs, vgs or lvs.
- nix23 6y agowell then call it volumes and vdev's?...i love zfs's layering.
- rleigh 6y agoThe Brtfs commands are very poor compared with what ZFS offers. The ZFS commands are organised around the end user: the system administrator. The Brtfs commands are not. As an example, you're running low on space and need to find out which datasets (subvolumes) are using the most space. How do you do that? With ZFS it's a single command which runs in a few milliseconds. With Btrfs...