On 2022-02-23 11:25, Ben Scott wrote: > Hi all, > > Btfrs vs ZFS. I was wondering if others would like to share their > opinions on either or both?
So... really, the two filesystems have a lot in in common. ZFS is absolutely more mature, especially WRT RAID (more below). But btrfs has some really nifty features, and with its arrival in Fedora, is getting the support it so badly needed. So, for me, the big win for btrfs is: alias clone='cp --reflink=always' Hey, presto! You just cloned your base 5 GB virtual image in under a second. You now have tow CoW "copies" of the exact same file, and unlike hard links, you are now free to munge them to your heart's content. NOW: the last time I checked for this on ZFS was sometime around the Sauron's revealing himself as a Dark Power, so maybe ZFS supports it now. And I totally know that ZFS supports lightweight snapshots (as does btrfs), but being able to clone a file -- or an entire hierarchy, such as all of my company's repos -- just so I can have a "play" hierarchy, and a not-play one is handy. Likewise, when editing video files, you can have the original and the tweaked one, with only the delta as additionally used storage. tl;dr: it's handy, especially for lots and lots of files in a hierarchy, or really big, related files. The bad: DO NOT DO RAID =~ /[56]/ ON btrfs. What I do is a ye-olde mdm RAID, and lay btrfs on top of that. Works the bomb. Doesn't give all the bells and whistles that a RAID-savvy FS would (e.g., only rebuilding places with data, instead of the entire volume), but I've had no problems. Last thing: Timeshift is really cool. I wrote my own scripts, but I admit, Timeshift gets 'er done. I assume, but do not know, that there's a similar utility that can make use of ZFS. -Ken _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
