New server build, single drive cache pool - btrfs or zfs?

[stewartwb]

I'm helping my son set up unRAID on a new server (Core i7-13700K, 32GB RAM, Solidigm P44 Pro 2TB SSD cache, 3x4TB protected array). He plans to run a bunch of VMs, including his primary Windows workstation, passing through an Nvidia 3070 GTX video card.

I've used unRAID for more than 10 years, but ZFS support is a new feature. We don't plan to set up a ZFS pool with multiple drives, just a single PCIe 4 M.2 drive. Which file system is best for this use case? I know ZFS supports advanced features, but I'm mainly interested in good performance for his virtual machines.

 

Can anyone offer first-hand knowledge of performance benefits / penalties for ZFS over btrfs for this scenario?

 

Thanks!

-- stewartwb

[Hoopster]

16 minutes ago, stewartwb said:

Can anyone offer first-hand knowledge of performance benefits / penalties for ZFS over btrfs for this scenario?

I cannot give you personal experience as I have yet to use ZFS for anything, but, for a single PCIe M.2 drive (is this a cache/pool disk?) , I would use XFS.  Others may see it differently.

[stewartwb]

This single M.2 drive is currently set up as the cache drive, with the intent to store virtual drives for VMs and any Docker file storage needs.

We formatted it ZFS, assuming newer is better, but I would have used btrfs previously for cache drives.

We are still using XFS for the Array drives.

[Takiyon]

Stay far away from btrfs. I had a drive die in one of my pools and it was a nightmare, and kept locking up the whole system. ZFS is basically remove and replace.