[Discuss] ZFS vs. Btrfs

[blu at nedharvey.com (Edward Ned Harvey (blu))]

> From: discuss-bounces+blu=nedharvey.com at blu.org [mailto:discuss-
> bounces+blu=nedharvey.com at blu.org] On Behalf Of Jerry Feldman
> 
> In my experiencein the workplace there have been many power failures. At
> Riverside we even had a bus hit a pole knocking out power to both us and
> the T. At IBMduring Sandy the UPS failed. Essentially, failures do
> occur. Fortunately our NAS system (Netgear readyNAS 3100) has been very
> clean. At home, I have not experienced any corruption on my ext4
> filesystems, but I don't beat it up that much.
> 
> In any case, I have always been a fan of btrees. I used reiserFS years
> ago, and many years ago I used IBM's VSAM which was essentially a
> btree-based system.
> 
> Another thing I like about btrfs is that you do not have to partition
> the physical drives.

All true, for both btrfs and zfs.  Technically, zfs uses Merkle tree, but effectively the same thing.