On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Edward Ned Harvey <opensolarisisdeadlongliveopensola...@nedharvey.com> wrote: > I recently put my first btrfs system into production. Here are the > similarities/differences I noticed different between btrfs and zfs: > > Differences: > * Obviously, one is meant for linux and the other solaris (etc) > * In btrfs, there is only raid1. They don't have raid5, 6, etc yet. > * In btrfs, snapshots are read-write. Cannot be made read-only without > quotas, which aren't implemented yet.
Minor correction: btrfs support ro snapshot. It's available on vanilla linux, but IIRC it requires an (unofficial) updated btrfs-progs (which basically tracks patches sent but not yet integrated to official tree), but it works. > * zfs supports quotas. Also, by default creates snapshots read-only but > could be made read-write by cloning. There are proposed patches for btrfs quota support, but the kernel part has not been accepted upstream. > * In btrfs, there is no equivalent or alternative to "zfs send | zfs > receive" Planned. No actual working implementation yet. > * In zfs, you have the hidden ".zfs" subdir that contains your snapshots. > * In btrfs, your snapshots need to be mounted somewhere, inside the same > filesystem. So in btrfs, you do something like this... Create a > filesystem, then create a subvol called "@" and use it to store all your > work. Later when you create snapshots, you essentially duplicate that > subvol "@2011-10-18-07-40-00" or something. Yes. basically btrfs treats a subvolume and snapshot in the same way. > * Both do compression. By default zfs compression is fast but you could use > zlib if you want. By default btrfs uses zlib, but you could opt for fast if > you want. lzo is planned to be the default in the future. -- Fajar _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
