> HFS+ lost a total of 28 files over the course of 6 years.
That's a good number for average users. No one is using HFS+ as a file server. Users who have lots of data use external backup devices (which are prone to HW failure, especially the WD external HDs) or oversight backup services.
ps. Anyone used this[1] on macosx? Can it replace HFS+ in the root partition?
UPDATE: The faq clearly states that it can't be used as a root partition:
Q) Can I boot my computer off of O3X?[edit]
A) No. O3X cannot be used as your main system partition.
I've used it and still am, in somewhat of an experiment, but with great results:
I used to work with ZFS for a living, so I want it to work - maybe that makes me biased.
I wrote an article on the wiki[0] on CoreStorage and Encryption together with ZFS and it's been working as expected for a couple of months now.
I currently use it to test family/friends backup with SyncThing[1] to see if it can make a (although bit hacky) viable backup solution for the common man, with file history based on routinely snapshots (which will make problems, e.g. how Dropbox explicitly doesn't sync open word documents, how a VMs disk image might not be super great to backup "as is" while in use).
As a final note: it can not replace HFS+ for TimeMachine backup either.
I'm not knowledgable enough in that area, but as far as I know the OS X root needs to be HFS.
I can only answer by similarity: to boot from Btrfs in ArchLinux you'll need to load kernel modules in the bootloader.
Two reason:
1. btrfs isn't "built in" and needs to be loaded.
2. the boot loader needs to be able to read btrfs (obvious, but mentioning for the sake of mentioning)
That's doable for btrfs/Arch because we can put our own bootloader with btrfs compatability in.
Which leads me to my speculative answer:
No. It might be possible with a third party bootloader (iBoot comes to mind), but to have Apple adopt the OpenZFS implementation, or to revive their own, seems unlikely.
My guess would be that they are working on something, mainly because they have to find an alternative. Other people have talked about this being a necessary next step for Mac for years, but it does seem plausible that its in the works.
EDIT: In case you mean full-featured as in "ZFS full featured", then yes, that's already there. Not Oracle full-featured, but ZoL (ZFS on Linux port) and somewhat IlluminOS compatible.
That's a good number for average users. No one is using HFS+ as a file server. Users who have lots of data use external backup devices (which are prone to HW failure, especially the WD external HDs) or oversight backup services.
ps. Anyone used this[1] on macosx? Can it replace HFS+ in the root partition?
UPDATE: The faq clearly states that it can't be used as a root partition:
Q) Can I boot my computer off of O3X?[edit] A) No. O3X cannot be used as your main system partition.
what a pitty :-(
[1] https://openzfsonosx.org/