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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

Would this just be to help with the rebuild time? Raid10 in ZFS is an interesting idea, which would also require two mirrors and striping.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Yes mirrors are the fastest to rebuild I believe, it's also to give you a backup, as any kind of raid or mirror is not a functional backup, it only provides redundancy.

    I would not do raid 10 for the same reason of no backup that way.

  • source
  • parent