zfs is really a study in cli ergonomics. It has a quite idiosyncratic CLI, which one might assume is a bad thing. But the CLI is so well thought out that learning this new "language" is quite intuitive.
btrfs uses a more traditional command, subcommand, args setup, which by itself is not a problem, but the actual command and subcommand structure is a dumpster fire to be charitable.
Try managing large groups of snapshots without custom tooling. The whole thing makes me sad really.
btrfs has a lot going for it at the architecture and disk format level (dedup is actually something theoretically useful, while the zfs design was flawed from the start), but the implementation has just never made it.
btrfs uses a more traditional command, subcommand, args setup, which by itself is not a problem, but the actual command and subcommand structure is a dumpster fire to be charitable.
Try managing large groups of snapshots without custom tooling. The whole thing makes me sad really.
btrfs has a lot going for it at the architecture and disk format level (dedup is actually something theoretically useful, while the zfs design was flawed from the start), but the implementation has just never made it.