Ben Scott writes:
> Hi all,
>
> We haven't had a really good flamewar ^W discussion on here in far too long...
>
> SUMMARY
>
> Btfrs vs ZFS. I was wondering if others would like to share their
> opinions on either or both? Or something else entirely? (Maybe you
> just don't feel alive if you'
(glances over at stack of full external USB drives...)
(shifts uncomfortably)
___
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
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 re
I'm nowhere near as familiar with FreeBSD as I am with Debian so there's
a bit more comfort to at least debug or know where to look when things
go wrong. That being said, if all you're looking for is a box to host
SMB/NFS/iSCSI then either will work fine.
Now on to concrete things that I see S
In a previous email, Mark Komarinski (mkomarin...@wayga.org) said:
> For everyone else, TrueNAS SCALE was released yesterday. Debian+ZFS
> makes this a lot more useful than when it was FreeBSD based.
I know this is a LUG list, but out of (perhaps morbid) curiosity, why "a lot
more useful"?
--
With LVM (and it looks like btrfs) you can pool mirrored drives together
into what is effectively a RAID10 and you can remove individual mirrors
to shrink or grow the pool. ZFS does not allow you to do that. Once you
expand a pool there's no going back. You can replace individual drives
in a
On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 11:44 AM Bruce Dawson wrote:
> Well, you're more concerned with files than large blocks of data, so I
> don't think either matter - other than standard filesystem performance.
I wouldn't go that far. In particular, snapshots at the block layer
are generally less efficient
Well, you're more concerned with files than large blocks of data, so I
don't think either matter - other than standard filesystem performance.
I've had some experience with ZFS, and practically none with btrfs. ZFS
is nice, but resource intensive. I suspect btrfs is similar, but
probably not in
Hi all,
We haven't had a really good flamewar ^W discussion on here in far too long...
SUMMARY
Btfrs vs ZFS. I was wondering if others would like to share their
opinions on either or both? Or something else entirely? (Maybe you
just don't feel alive if you're not compiling your kernel from
pat
