On 16/04/12 20:12, Russell Coker wrote:
ZFS seems to be a lot more complex than BTRFS. While having more features is a good thing (BTRFS seems to be missing some sysadmin friendly features) complexity means more testing and more potential for making mistakes.
I've played around with ZFS and btrfs quite a bit by now, and I'm still not happy with btrfs. It's just too easy to get a total kernel segfault on btrfs -- whereas ZFS just keeps chugging away reliably. I suspect this is because btrfs is still basically pre-alpha software -- it's in active development, there's been no attempt to feature-freeze and debug it, and there won't be for some time. However ZFS has been around for years on other platforms, and just needed to be ported to Linux's VFS system. That code has been in a kind of beta-stage for some time now, and it's bedded down fairly well. Toby