[imiric]

I would still go with a collection of composable tools rather than something monolithic as ZFS, and to avoid the learning curve. But again, for personal use. If you're planning to use ZFS in a professional setting it might be good to experiment with it at home.

[j1elo]

As mentioned in the sibling comment, one thing I like is having systems that don't require me to supervise, fix things, etc. In part that's why I've been alwas a user of ext4, it just works.

But I've recently found bitrotin some of my data files and now that I happened to be learning about how to build a NAS, I wanted to make the jump to some FS that helps me with that task.

Could you mention which tools you would use to replace ZFS? Think of checksumming, snapshotting, and to a lesser degree, replication/RAID.

[kaba0]

I would argue that a collection of mostly composable tools can easily be much more complex (and bug-prone!) than a single “monolith”. Less moving parts can be good sometimes and I would argue that a file system/volume management is a very compact problem domain where better integration between the tools is more important than extendibility.