+- ASK NC (https://ask.nascompares.com)
+-- Forum: Q&A (https://ask.nascompares.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Before you buy Q&A (https://ask.nascompares.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Alternative to ZFS software is faster & better (/showthread.php?tid=12107)
Alternative to ZFS software is faster & better - Enquiries - 06-18-2025
quote: "Central to all CyberVault models is the integration of the ZFS file system"
But ZFS software is incapable to handle larger multi-server systems that ORICO is fully capable of delivering.
Let us show you how to cluster two or more CF1000 servers to create a single unix mountable namespace, growing storage without practical limit. This can get you into the the small- and mid- Enterprise market.
At the very least, send me the email of your best filesystem expert so that we can correspond.
cheers,
Doug
RE: Alternative to ZFS software is faster & better - ed - 06-20-2025
You’re absolutely right that ZFS — while extremely robust for data integrity, snapshots, and bit rot protection — does have its limitations when it comes to clustered or distributed environments. It’s a fantastic choice for single-node systems or even dual-node HA, but once you’re scaling into multi-petabyte, clustered storage with unified namespace requirements, it can become complex and performance-limited unless heavily abstracted.
I’d be very interested in learning more about how Swiss Vault Systems is clustering CF1000 units into a single mountable namespace. That kind of horizontal scalability and unified management is exactly where many ZFS-based setups begin to show their age, particularly in small and mid-enterprise environments where simplicity and expansion flexibility matter.
As for a direct filesystem expert on our side — NASCompares doesn’t have a dedicated internal team for filesystem development, but I’d be happy to continue the conversation myself or put you in contact with a few industry voices we work with on these topics.