I switched to ZFS a decade ago. Before that I used mdadm and LVM. Before that I used hardware RAID. I also dabbled in BTRFS but didn't like it. I usually play w

I switched to ZFS a decade ago. Before that I used mdadm and LVM. Before that I used hardware RAID. I also dabbled in BTRFS but didn't like it. I usually play with any new filesystem that has 5 years maturity and a big userbase, but nowadays my go-to filesystems are ext4 and ZFS. I use ext4 mainly because it's the "blessed" filesystem of linux. It's simple, does what I want, and I have yet to be bitten by it. That's good enough for general use in situations where I don't care about file integrity. ZFS marks the first time I've been able to breathe easy, knowing that my backups aren't storing corrupt files because of a raid write hole or hardware silent corruption that I won't discover for months or even years (likely long past any restore point on my backups). Don't trust the hardware. At all. Hardware fails all the time, often silently, and can't be audited because the code and silicon are closed source so you have absolutely NO indication as to its quality (other than Backblaze reports [1]). You'll never know what demons lurk in those depths, but with paranoid software like ZFS, you don't have to care. The only time I use non-ZFS filesystems is when I don't care about data integrity on that drive, such as pushbutton rebuildable server boot disks with backed up configurations (NixOS is great here), or cache/scratch drives. If it ever becomes easier to make ZFS boot disks, I'll probably start using them for server boot disks as well, just so that I can be alerted whenever a drive starts to fail. [1] https://www.backblaze.com/b2/hard-drive-test-data.html https://www.backblaze.com/b2/hard-drive-test-data.html