Readme states data is safe, release notes and installer says data is not

[different-name]

The readme states "your ZFS data will be safe"

However, release zfs-windows-2.2.2-rc1 mentions a fix regarding the trim bug corrupting pools, and importantly, the windows installer talks about how this is an experimental project that should be only used in a VM, and that data may be lost

The readme should be updated to reflect the installer warnings

[lundman]

I guess, what does upstream say about trim bug, the file clone bugs and send/recv bugs?

[different-name]

I'm not sure, I'm not knowledgeable on this 😅
As a user, I was more concerned with the conflicting readme advising that the driver was safe to use, and the installer warning not to use the driver due to data loss concerns

[guenther-alka]

My personal view

Is ZFS on Windows beta?
Yes it is. This means it is not ready for critical use like any beta. This is mainly related to Windows integration aspects but also in relation to OpenZFS when it comes to the version it is using (latest stable, Master or Master+)

Is data on ZFS on Windows more unsecure than data on OpenZFS Linux?
Not per se as the ZFS part is quite the same. If you would use the same release state on Linux, it may be similar but on most distributions you are on an older release up to latest stable. I suppose a stable ZFS on Windows would also use latest stable instead OpenZFS Master or Master+. (OpenZFS on Windows 2,2,6 appeared a few days prior OpenZFS Linux 2.2.6 with newest fast dedup commits already included)

If you follow the OpenZFS issue tracker on Linux, you see that there are problems left up to dataloss in rare cases. Do backup even with ZFS optionally to a pool with features disabled or an Illumos OpenZFS pool with less known problems.

Why OpenZFS Master/ newest on ZFS on Windows instead latest stable or even an older one?
I remember a comment from Jorgen Lundman that OpenZFS on Windows must be at the head of OpenZFS development to have a chance to be seen as a serious option.

[different-name]

That makes a lot of sense. I do not have the knowledge to know which, but either the readme or the installer should be updated to reflect the other

In my eyes, they are currently contradictory with eachother, with the readme ensuring data security (at least on par with the latest ZFS versions) and the installer warning of the opposite

[guenther-alka]

Propably two independent items

The installer is mainly about the openzfs.sys driver that is definitely beta as it handles the integration of ZFS in Windows. The other is OpenZFS itself that can have its own bugs especially when using the newest OpenZFS release.

Of course there are some dependencies like the driveletter property only available on Windows but in general the installer for openzfs.sys and OpenZFS can and do have a different stability state sometimes related to ZFS properties like trim or encryption..

In general if you have two stability ratings in a system where you need both, care about the lower one. Even when data on ZFS is safe, this does not help when you cannot access ex due mount problems in Windows.

[lundman]

OK I will roll out rc9, you guys decided on some text to go ?

[guenther-alka]

I would clarify the 3 risks and the problems example

1. The OpenZFS driver openzfy.sys is currently beta. Installing comes with a risk of a bsod up to a damaged Windows installation with possible boot loop problems especially in combination with an encrypted systemdisk. It is suggested to use it in in a VM or in combination with a tested Windows recovery method. Data on a ZFS Pool is usually safe with driver related problems. If data is important, do backups to another filesystem ex ntfs.

2. Problems in relation to behaviours special to Windows like the driveletter property or mount related problems. Data on a ZFS pool is usually safe with such Windows only problems. If data is important, do backups to another filesystem ex ntfs.

3. Upstream OpenZFS bugs that can result in a dataloss. When using OpenZFS latest the risk is quite similar to other OpenZFS platforms like Free-BSD or Linux. Using a newer OpenZFS Master can add an additional risk of unfixed upstream bugs. If data is important, do backups to another filesystem ex ntfs. (A freeze of openzfs.sys rc versions on a stable OpenZFS latest can reduce this extra risk)