←back to thread

222 points ksec | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.198s | source
Show context
betaby ◴[] No.45076609[source]
The sad part, that despite the years of the development BTRS never reached the parity with ZFS. And yesterday's news "Josef Bacik who is a long-time Btrfs developer and active co-maintainer alongside David Sterba is leaving Meta. Additionally, he's also stepping back from Linux kernel development as his primary job." see https://www.phoronix.com/news/Josef-Bacik-Leaves-Meta

There is no 'modern' ZFS-like fs in Linux nowadays.

replies(4): >>45076793 #>>45076833 #>>45078150 #>>45080011 #
tw04 ◴[] No.45080011[source]
There's literally ZFS-on-linux and it works great. And yes, I will once again say Linus is completely wrong about ZFS and the multiple times he's spoken about it, it's abundantly clear he's never used it or bothered to spend any time researching its features and functionality.

https://zfsonlinux.org/

replies(5): >>45080040 #>>45080220 #>>45081040 #>>45082703 #>>45084105 #
mort96 ◴[] No.45082703[source]
To me, ZFS on Linux is extremely uninteresting except for the specific use case of a NAS with a bunch of drives. I don't want to deal with out-of-tree filesystems unless I absolutely have to. And even on a NAS, I would want the root partition to be ext4 or btrfs or something else that's in the kernel.
replies(1): >>45083258 #
1. rob_c ◴[] No.45083258[source]
> the specific use case of a NAS with a bunch of drives

Aka a way bigger part of the industry than it should probably still be ;)