• Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    HFS+ has a different features set than NTFS or ext4, Apple elect to store metadata that way.

    I would imagine modern FS like ZFS or btrfs could benefit from doing something similar but nobody has chosen to implement something like that in that way.

      • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        I gotcha:

        • Btrfs
          • BTree File System
            • A Copy on White file system that supports snapshots, supported mostly by
        • ZFS
          • Zetabyte File System
            • Copy on Write File System. Less flexible than BTRFS but generally more robust and stable. Better compression in my experience than BTRFS. Out of Kernel Linux support and native FreeBSD.
        • HFS+
          • what Mac uses, I have no clue about this. some Copy on Write stuff.
        • NTFS
          • Windows File System
          • From what I know, no compression or COW
          • In my experience less stable than ext4/ZFS but maybe it’s better nowadays.
          • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Well that’s good to know because I had some terrible luck with it about a decade ago. Although I don’t think I would go back to windows, I just don’t need it for work anymore and it’s become far too complex.

            I’ve also had pretty bad luck with BTRFS though, although it seems to have improved a lot in the past 3 years that I’ve been using it.

            ZFS would be good but having to rebuild the kernel module is a pain in the ass because when it fails to build you’re unbootable (on root). I also don’t like how clones are dependant on parents, requires a lot of forethought when you’re trying to create a reproducible build on eg Gentoo.