3 ms·

Already don't use ZoL because of their history of arms shrug-level support coupled with a lack of QA. ZoL != Solaris ZFS. It is mostly an aspirational cargo cul

Already don't use ZoL because of their history of arms shrug-level support coupled with a lack of QA. ZoL != Solaris ZFS. It is mostly an aspirational cargo cult. Only a few fses like XFS and Ext4 have meaningful real-world, enterprise deployment hours. Technically, btrfs has significant (web ops instead of IT ops) deployment exposure due to its use on 10M boxes at Meta. Many non-mainstream fses also aren't assured to be trustworthy because of their low usage and prevalent lack of thorough, formalized QA. There's nothing wrong with experimentation, but it's necessary to have an accurate understanding of the risk budget for a given technology for a given use-case.

volkadav 2y ago
I sympathize with your concerns for stability and testing, but I think that you might reconsider things in open-source ZFS land. OpenZFS/ZoL have been merged since the 2.0 release several years back, and some very large (e.g. Netflix) environments use FreeBSD which in turn uses OpenZFS, as well as being in use by the various Illumos derivatives and such. It is true that there has been some feature divergence between Oracle ZFS and OpenZFS since the fork, but as I recall that was more "nice to haves" like fs-native encryption than essential reliability fixes, fwiw.
- ComputerGuru 2y ago
  Don't disagree with your post but netflix doesn't use zfs for a couple of reasons, one of which is broken sendfile support (though that might be fixed soon!).