Different file systems are optimized for different workloads and use cases. If you're just installing Linux on a laptop for medium-duty use, then you don't need

Different file systems are optimized for different workloads and use cases. If you're just installing Linux on a laptop for medium-duty use, then you don't need anything special and can go with whatever general-purpose FS the distribution recommends, usually ext4. (Although I am partial to XFS myself.) You only need to consider more specialized filesystems if you have unique needs. For example, if you are setting up a file server, you might want a filesystem that is good at disk redundancy and data durability. Or you might need a filesystem that can handle billions of small files. Or you might have a huge database that needs random access to large amounts of flash storage. All of these are very different scenarios that require different (competing) things from the filesystems. In this case, bcachefs _seems_ to be promising many of the features of ZFS but with a better design and less overhead, potentially bringing these features to general-purpose workloads as well. (ZFS is fairly resource-intensive: in order to make full use of its features, you need a dedicated box for it, or really beef up the hardware on the application server that it will run on.)