[Discuss] ZFS On Linux "in" Debian, migration from Btrfs

[gaf.linux at gmail.com (Jerry Feldman)]

Richard, why are you moving to ZFS when you already have BTRFS. Certainly
ZFS is more mature.

On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Dan Ritter <dsr at randomstring.org> wrote:

> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 01:39:51PM -0400, Jerry Feldman wrote:
> > Please share your experiences with both BTRFS and ZFS.
>
>
> I use btrfs in RAID 1 and RAID 10 mode on spinning disks, RAID 1 on ssd,
> zfs in RAID 10 on spinning disks with independent ZIL and L2ARC (read
> and write caches) on ssd, and in RAID 1 on ssd.
>
> btrfs is a little faster, but the only time this makes a
> significant difference is in weekly scrubbing, where btrfs does
> it at about twice the rate of zfs.
>
> btrfs has a nocow option that can be set on directories or
> individual files which can dramatically improve performance for
> databases and VM images. But... that also turns off
> checksumming, which is one of the big reasons to use zfs or
> btrfs in the first place. It also turns off compression.
>
> zfs does not have a nocow option at all. If you are running a
> production database, zfs is not your friend for the database
> storage.
>
> zfs has better tools for snapshotting.
>
> zfs is generally more flexible about turning options on and
> off... except for deduplication. Do not experiment with
> deduplication. zfs has many, many options.
>
> Both support rsync-like incremental send and receive functions,
> nearly instantaneous snapshotting. and compression with a couple
> of algorithms.
>
> -dsr-
>



-- 
--
Jerry Feldman <gaf.linux at gmail.com>
Boston Linux and Unix
PGP key id: B7F14F2F
Key fingerprint: D937 A424 4836 E052 2E1B  8DC6 24D7 000F B7F1 4F2F