4 ms·

> Meanwhile ZFS is far far better than the alternatives (btrfs) in terms of data integrity and reliability. No, it's not. Btrfs is nowadays perfectly reliable

> Meanwhile ZFS is far far better than the alternatives (btrfs) in terms of data integrity and reliability. No, it's not. Btrfs is nowadays perfectly reliable as long as you avoid the in development features which are all explicitly marked as in development and will warn you. That's why Facebook uses it in production. It also has some nice advantage for home use. Btrfs pools are a lot simpler to manage and have less quirks than ZFS. > Maybe it is just stockholm syndrome but do you really, really need to dynamically expand your array by an arbitrary number of disks that badly? There is ultimately no way around the reliability question so you can't expand forever and if you're serious about setting up a nice fileserver that'll be reliable for the long run, putting 4 drives in it isn't that bad. Btrfs will do that just fine for example. That's really a limitation of ZFS. I wish ZFS users would just stop FUDing about btrfs. Most of them haven't touched it for a decade and keep paroting the same old things.

nix23 5y ago
I used/use SLES for a long time, and there is a strong recommendation from SUSE itself how you should btrfs with SLES. -Just use it for the OS, XFS for data -Just use it in mirror configuration -Don't touch anything else -Make Snapshots and delete them is stable With those points, i too had never a problem.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  Novell controls the XFS development and Redhat has bought a competing technology. Obviously they are not going to push Btrfs. Its use amongst large companies speak for itself however. I see that tge ZFS fanboys are out in force however. I mean, people should be free to use a second class citizen zoth a terrible license and a pool gestion made for masochists if they want.
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Why is Novell's statement that BTRFS is only narrowly useful trivially ignored but large companies eg Facebook using it meant to be interpreted as positive proof while handily ignoring that Facebook is using it for ephemeral data.
    - nix23 5y ago
      >ignoring that Facebook is using it for ephemeral data What really?? That's hilarious!! Probably just because of zstd compression i would think.
  - nix23 5y ago
    >Novell controls the XFS development and Redhat has bought a competing technology. What? Are you trolling? Redhat is the biggest contributor to XFS > Silicon Graphics Red Hat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS >Its use amongst large companies speak for itself however. Tell me please? Facebook and.....? >second class citizen zoth a terrible license RHEL does not support btrfs anymore (since 2017) i wonder why is that...oh right RHEL is not a experimental distribution. I would say btrfs is not first class at all (ext4 and XFS is), i just wait until Linus and his Fedora create some entertaining emails.

nix23 5y ago

I used/use SLES for a long time, and there is a strong recommendation from SUSE itself how you should btrfs with SLES. -Just use it for the OS, XFS for data -Just use it in mirror configuration -Don't touch anything else -Make Snapshots and delete them is stable With those points, i too had never a problem.

WastingMyTime89 5y ago
Novell controls the XFS development and Redhat has bought a competing technology. Obviously they are not going to push Btrfs. Its use amongst large companies speak for itself however. I see that tge ZFS fanboys are out in force however. I mean, people should be free to use a second class citizen zoth a terrible license and a pool gestion made for masochists if they want.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Why is Novell's statement that BTRFS is only narrowly useful trivially ignored but large companies eg Facebook using it meant to be interpreted as positive proof while handily ignoring that Facebook is using it for ephemeral data.
  - nix23 5y ago
    >ignoring that Facebook is using it for ephemeral data What really?? That's hilarious!! Probably just because of zstd compression i would think.
- nix23 5y ago
  >Novell controls the XFS development and Redhat has bought a competing technology. What? Are you trolling? Redhat is the biggest contributor to XFS > Silicon Graphics Red Hat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XFS >Its use amongst large companies speak for itself however. Tell me please? Facebook and.....? >second class citizen zoth a terrible license RHEL does not support btrfs anymore (since 2017) i wonder why is that...oh right RHEL is not a experimental distribution. I would say btrfs is not first class at all (ext4 and XFS is), i just wait until Linus and his Fedora create some entertaining emails.