I came to say similar things. After having had problems with ZFS (on Solaris) and btrfs, but never on ext4 or other "simple" filesystems i am wondering if i need and want all that complexity in my filesystem: And no, i don't.
Snapshots are nice, sure. But i'd rather do that on top of my filesystem (they're called backups) and leave the filesystem lean, simple, fast AND reliable. Every filesystem may have its own problems, but i feel that the "attack surface" of my filesystem should be as small as possible.
Do i rather want to have a bug in my filesystem implementation concerning snapshots or would i rather have that bug in my backup tool?
IMO, the FS should be rockstable and lean and not "cool and fancy". I can do fancy on top of rockstable.
Snapshots are nice, sure. But i'd rather do that on top of my filesystem (they're called backups) and leave the filesystem lean, simple, fast AND reliable. Every filesystem may have its own problems, but i feel that the "attack surface" of my filesystem should be as small as possible. Do i rather want to have a bug in my filesystem implementation concerning snapshots or would i rather have that bug in my backup tool?
IMO, the FS should be rockstable and lean and not "cool and fancy". I can do fancy on top of rockstable.