Quote Originally Posted by bluetomato View Post
Kebabbert - you seem to love the sound of your own voice. There's a saying "I don't need anger management, you just need to STFU". This applies very much in your case. If Solaris were a blow-up doll, you would be pimping yourself out day and night.
Thanks for your constructive remark.

Coming back to important facts - of which you don't have ANY in your posts - BtrFS is superior to ZFS due to pervasive usage of B+ trees.
So you do have important facts? That BTRFS is superior because it uses B+ trees? Are you serious? Let me see..
-BTRFS is the best!
-Because it uses B+ trees!
-So? Does that Btrfs superior? Why?
-Just because it is, here is the important fact: "BTRFS is superior because it uses B+ trees!"

Can you show me your important facts? Everyone knows that BTRFS uses B+ trees, but why is that better? Can you show us that important fact?

They may have similar features and hence high-level users like yourself may think that ZFS is the original, since it came earlier. However, BtrFS (named for B+ TRee FS) has a newer and more original approach, which lets it deliver ZFS features in a simpler and more elegant manner. Makes BtrFS more flexible as well. e.g.
BTRFS is a ZFS wannabe, and ripoff. Just like Systemtap is a DTrace wannabe and ripoff. BTRFS is a lesser copy, inferior to ZFS. There are lot of features that ZFS have, that BTRFS lacks.

You sound like "XXX is better, because it is written in C!! And YYY is written in Pascal!!!". Why do I care what language YYY is written in? As long as YYY is more stable, better, and have more features I dont care if it is written in BASIC.

If ZFS is using a data structure, and BTRFS uses another data structure, why would I care? As long as ZFS is safe, stable and superior I do not care. Your argument is quite strange actually. BTRFS is superior because it uses another data structure. Does that automatically make BTRFS better and more stable? No, it is up to the developers. If the developers are bad, then it does not matter which data structure they are using, or which programming language the software will still be bad.

A bad programmer can screw up things, even if he uses the best programming language and data structures. Whereas a good programmer will succeed even if he uses a bad language and bad data structures.

Can you convert ext4 to ZFS on the fly ? No. But you can convert ext4 to BTRFS on the fly. Why ? Please do some research on why...
The reason you can not convert ext4 to ZFS, is because no Solaris user runs that unsafe filesystem called ext4. I hope you know that ext4 is unsafe, and might corrupt your data.

Do you mean because BTRFS has a specific feature that ZFS does not have, this single feature makes BTRFS better and more stable etc? Are you serious? There a LOTS of features that ZFS have, that BTRFS lack. Do you want me to write down a list and ask "can BTRFS do this? No? Then it must be bad"?

I registered just to tell you to either talk like an Engineer or STFU. You fill your empty posts with vast amounts of meandering prose to hide the complete lack of any content. Please don't waste any more electrons - there's a kid somewhere in a developing country who needs it more.
I dont see you talk like an engineer? You provided no support for your claims, it was just propaganda with no backup. And also, you insulted me. On the other hand, I provided links and support for my claims.

Other than that, welcome to this forum!