I currently have a secondary pool (with raidz2) that I was originally going to use for my important documents, such as storage for Paperless-ngx, as raidz offers corruption detection and repair. The pool is encrypted.

However, I’m concerned about rebuild times (it’s a pool of 4 22TB drives). Is btrfs a better choice for this use case, or should I just go with raidz like I originally planned?

  • oats@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Filesystem doesn’t really matter once you have a reliable, redundant off-site backup and recovery plan set up and tested.

    Really, use what fs feels best for you. And do your backups.

    Did I mention backups are important?

    • CorrectAlias@piefed.blahaj.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 minutes ago

      I should have mentioned that I was (and still am) using XFS for my primary pool. XFS has been great, I was just hoping for a solution which would make it so I don’t have to hit my backups unless absolutely necessary (such as full array loss, for example). ZFS’ data corruption protection is very intriguing, it’s mostly the rebuild time and write speed that is making me think about doing something else.