OP is not suggesting ZFS above
all else.
> And every enterprise system has already moved way past what ZFS can do, including enterprise-class offerings based on ZFS from Sun, Nexenta, and iXsystems.
However, OP is naturally suggesting ZFS over NTFS, HFS+, ext3/4 and even ReFS and APFS.
> Still, ZFS is way better than legacy storage SOHO filesystems. The lack of integrity checking, redundancy, and error recovery makes NTFS (Windows), HFS+ (macOS), and ext3/4 (Linux) wholly inappropriate for use as a long-term storage platform. And even ReFS and APFS, lacking data integrity checking, aren’t appropriate where data loss cannot be tolerated.
> And every enterprise system has already moved way past what ZFS can do, including enterprise-class offerings based on ZFS from Sun, Nexenta, and iXsystems.
However, OP is naturally suggesting ZFS over NTFS, HFS+, ext3/4 and even ReFS and APFS.
> Still, ZFS is way better than legacy storage SOHO filesystems. The lack of integrity checking, redundancy, and error recovery makes NTFS (Windows), HFS+ (macOS), and ext3/4 (Linux) wholly inappropriate for use as a long-term storage platform. And even ReFS and APFS, lacking data integrity checking, aren’t appropriate where data loss cannot be tolerated.