3 ms·
In this context, it depends on what one considers "a normal user," but I have found that this, OpenZFS on Linux, and OpenZFS on Windows makes ZFS a better cross
by mdaniel 4y ago
In this context, it depends on what one considers "a normal user," but I have found that this, OpenZFS on Linux, and OpenZFS on Windows makes ZFS a better cross-platform FS for my needs. I didn't enjoy the exFAT experience, and despite their portability claims, I never got UDF to work at all on any OS (I don't run FreeBSD, so maybe that explains my lack of success)
I have read the warnings about not using ZFS on USB disks, but thus far either I've been very lucky or my "USB threat model" is not the same as the people offering those warnings
- Hackbraten 4y agoI’ve used it over USB 3 for several years. The thing is that USB controller hardware isn’t perfect, and the bus can break down. If it does break down, chances are the pool metadata becomes corrupt, which means the pool is irretrievably lost. In theory, a corrupted zpool isn’t a problem, because you should be backing up your pool all the time. In practice, it’s a double-edged sword. The downside is that whenever the pool becomes corrupt, you have to do a restore. The upside is that whenever the pool becomes corrupt, you get to do a restore, which you probably wouldn’t do regularly otherwise. Whether or not your bus is going to break down sporadically is unpredictable. With one Mac, it never happened. With another, it’s happened twice a year.