[eriknstr]

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.

[MikusR]

ReFS has data integrity checking and repair.

[sfoskett]

...but ReFS File Integrity is disabled by default! Integrity streams are enabled for metadata only. Here's how to turn it on: https://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/jj218351%28v=wps...

[X86BSD]

Interesting. I'd like to know what the "enterprise" has moved on to from ZFS.

[sfoskett]

Enterprise Storage == Real Storage Arrays

Basically every storage array is years beyond ZFS in terms of features and capabilities. Even the ones based on ZFS! And I don't think anyone would argue that. After all, Dell EMC, HPE, Pure Storage, HDS, etc spend many millions a year developing advanced storage technologies.