@enumerator4829@sh.itjust.works
Post #2968448
2026-02-25 01:13 UTC
Look, there is a reason *everyone* who actually knows this stuff use ZFS. A good reason. ZFS is really fucking good and BTRFS has absolutely nothing on it. It’s a toy in comparison. ZFS is the gold standard in this class.
You have four sane options:
- mdraid raid5 with BTRFS on top. Raid5 on BTRFS still isn’t stable as far as I know, not even in 2026.
- Mirror or triple mirror with mdraid. Have the third drive in the pool as more redundancy or outside the pool as separate unraided filesystem.
- Same as above, but BTRFS. Raid1 is stable.
- ZFS RaidZ1 (=raid5)
(Not sure about bit rot recovery when running BTRFS on mdraid. All variants should at least have bit rot detection.)
To reiterate, *every* storage professional I know has a ZFS-pool at home (and probably everywhere else they can have it, including production pools). They group BTRFS with Ext3, if they even know about it. When I built my home server, the distro and hardware was selected around running ZFS. Distros without good support for ZFS were disregarded right away.
Replies (1)
-
@GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml 2026-02-25 19:33
Sorry but I find this claim irreconcilable with how SLES and Fedora default to btrfs with their installations, or how a company like Meta uses it across their entire fleet. I don’t know if Meta uses the raid feature directly or if they use, as you suggested, mdraid with btrfs on top. I know that that’s what Synology does.