4 ms·

> I don't think scrubbing will keep him from losing data when one of those drives fails or gets corrupted. It pains me to see a ZFS pool with no redundancy bec

> I don't think scrubbing will keep him from losing data when one of those drives fails or gets corrupted. It pains me to see a ZFS pool with no redundancy because instead of being "blissfully" ignorant of bit rot, you'll be alerted to its presence and then have to attempt to recover the files manually via the replica on the other NAS. I appreciate that the author recognizes what his goals are, and that pool level redundancy is not one of them, but my goals are very different.

Fnoord 3y ago
In my setup I combine one machine with ZFS with another running btrsfs, therefore using rsync/restic. And Apple devices uses APFS. I'd rather use ZFS solely (or in future: bcachefs) but unfortunately Apple went w/their native next-gen CoW filesystem and I don't think ZFS is available for Synology DSM. Though perhaps I should simply replace DSM with something more my liking (Debian-based, Proxmox).
- herewulf 3y ago
  DSM doesn't support ZFS. It does support btrfs (the default), FWIW.