Originally posted by starshipeleven
View Post
And always this rush, so 2016 btrfs was not ready for bigger stuff. so if it takes btrfs till 1/2018 or something then its to late and garbage and somehow should never ever be considered at all, while ever a year ago it had alreade some advantages in some usecases. you can use it easily as root, you dont need 5mio gb ram so for most private non-professional users its most of the time already the better choice.
Most normal people use raid 1 or something. But it helps to see some reason why zfs structuraly has a wrong design, that makes my guts feeling and experience with btrfs more backed up.
So I am no religious btrfs supporter or something, I just find it absolutily inacceptable to use a filesystem that doesnt scale to lower end hardware, and where you have forever use some strange custom setups with kernel patching and shit ilke that.
And its not only that, as far as I understand zfs lisense situation, they forked basicly a old version of it. So at some point they either have to reverse-engineer new stuff from oracle upstream or even become incompatible if they want to add new features. So in the long run there will be 2 incompatibel zfs versions.
(but I might be wrong, I am happy to hear some alternative explenation).
So if the lisensing of this new fs is good, and there are advantages over btrfs? I mean you hear great stuff about Rust things especialy that its faster, like C but better. I dont like the syntax of the language (lisp guy), but if other people do great stuff with it go for it.
Are there any advantages over btrfs in the pipe or done already? Or is it just another me-too thing?
Comment