| ▲ | gspr an hour ago | |
So many really brilliant people keep saying this, so I don't doubt that it's true. Can you explain to an ordinary user why ZFS isn't everywhere? It seems to be a marvel, yet ext4 lives on. | ||
| ▲ | storagebits 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
I would say (in no particular order) that the CDDL license is not innocent, ext4 is good enough for many usages, cost ? ZFS is RAM hungry ... but ZFS is well present where it means most (NASes , Proxmox , backups to tell some) | ||
| ▲ | creata 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | |
ext4 is in the kernel, and ZFS has this weird ARC thing (its own filesystem cache; I don't know why it can't just use Linux's page cache). Those are the (frivolous) reasons I don't use it on my computers. If it weren't for those two factors I think it'd be a lot more popular (and Btrfs might not exist). | ||