----------------eredeti üzenet----------------- Feladó: "Lindsay Mathieson" Címzett: "PVE User List" Dátum: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 06:58:15 +1000 ------------------------------------------------- > Why not ZFS? its a lot more mature than btrfs. > > > -- > Lindsay Mathieson >
Hi, Exactly. My preferred usage is with the latest Proxmox: - ZFS on HDD/SSD (log+l2arc cache) tuning and contains the rootfs, too - ZVOL as virtual hard drive for kvm guests - btrfs on the ZVOL - the only reason is the simple CoW feature, which supported by the mainline kernels and able to install almost any distributions onto btrfs (or convert ext3/4 to btrfs) My experience is, comparing zfs to btrfs, zfs is much more comfortable and simple to use, more mature and used in heavy production for a looong time, even some guys still consider not-production-ready (anyway, it is a PEBCAK, not zfs fault). Btrfs only used to provide CoW feauture, otherwise all other features of btrfs could be turned off, because zfs will protect it well enough: checksum, compression. Some benefits of btrfs are: - supported on 32 bit systems, - rootfs on btrfs supported without any tricks - and I think all new kernels support it out of the box. Otherwise btrfs is not my favourite, due to - its difficult commands, - how it implements subvolumes and the whole layout, - missing low-overhead compression (lz4), - incompatibilities with older kernels (imagine that, your development workstation has a new kernel, while your embedded system has older btrfs and you format a new SD card with btrfs, which will be not supported by the old system) -I had something strange "balance" problems in the past with btrfs and I had to do voodoo tricks to get it work again after googling out the solution - my opinion, it is still experimental even I plan to use it in zvol Bye, István _______________________________________________ pve-user mailing list [email protected] http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
