I use ZFS on my desktop actually. I find it’s kind of annoying to setup, but once that’s done it’s way easier to manage. The best part for me is not having to play around with my fstab file like I’d have to with btrfs. I think ZFS is more resiliant anyway.
ZFS promises dedupe and super-simple snap synch to another host.
What I liked it for over e4 is the far greater inode count per file, as my backup setup was doing hardlink(1) and running into the boundary a lot.
Now I like its trivial snapshotting as a periodic rollback target on my file server to recover from occasional oopses; hook the .snaps up to a smbd and people can grab their own files back from the brink.
I still use like 90% e4 though. More stable and reliable than xfs, it’s good for everything you value.
What do you love about it? My NAS is set on the old classic RAID5+ext 4. Nothing too safe, but i guess it has worked well for me all these years.
I use ZFS on my desktop actually. I find it’s kind of annoying to setup, but once that’s done it’s way easier to manage. The best part for me is not having to play around with my fstab file like I’d have to with btrfs. I think ZFS is more resiliant anyway.
ZFS promises dedupe and super-simple snap synch to another host.
What I liked it for over e4 is the far greater inode count per file, as my backup setup was doing
hardlink(1)and running into the boundary a lot.Now I like its trivial snapshotting as a periodic rollback target on my file server to recover from occasional oopses; hook the .snaps up to a smbd and people can grab their own files back from the brink.
I still use like 90% e4 though. More stable and reliable than xfs, it’s good for everything you value.