Examining btrfs, Linux’s perpetually half-finished filesystem

Where are we at with Btrfs vs ZFS in 2024 as i've not seen anyone argue about in online for ages?

Ubuntu has reinstated ZFS again as experimental on the installer.
 
I'm using it on an arch install on my main pc and it seems stable enough. I'm not a power user by any means though so as long as files don't corrupt or disappear then I'm fine with it. I think i read somewhere about better perf (maybe marginal but hey I thought try the new thing) vs zfs so that's why I went for it.
 
Ice Tea said:
Where are we at with Btrfs vs ZFS in 2024 as i've not seen anyone argue about in online for ages?

Ubuntu has reinstated ZFS again as experimental on the installer.
Click to expand...
So my understanding is that if you’re using it in a ‘single’ disk setup (as in not RAID) then it’s pretty stable, and that has certainly been my experience running it on Fedora.

RAID on the other hand is still terrifying and I personally would be hesitant to risk it (unless the data has no importance or you have exceptionally good backups)

Overall though, unless the licensing is a factor for you, I would err towards ZFS if I had the choice between the two
 
When I used to use Linux as my main OS I used OpenSUSE Tumbleweed as my Linux distro and it uses btrfs by default. It was great being able to rollback changes if anything went wrong especially as it was a rolling release distro.
 
Used BRTFS for a while now on Debian and never had any issues. I probably won't use ZFS on Linux as it very much feels like a second-class citizen compared to the native ZFS on FreeBSD in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom