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?

Edit: I should have mentioned that I already have 4-3-2 backups configured - I’m primarily interested in the “self-healing” aspect of ZFS so that I don’t have to recover from backups unless necessary, and to resolve corruption on the fly without me having to notice that a file is corrupt.

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

    Raid 10 is and interesting idea for sure. It would certainly help with write speeds, although if I want to utilize the “self-healing” of ZFS, I’d need to do two (separately striped) vdevs that mirror each other to get the equivalent to RAID10, right?

    • exu@feditown.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      You’d create two mirror vdevs in the same zpool to get the raid 10 equivalent