Is there any point in ZFS on hardware RAID?

Question

ZFS

There is a DELL server in which 8 HDDs are combined by a hardware controller in RAID 6. BBU, that's all.
There is a task to hoist FreeNAS there and organize a fallopomoyka.
Question: Does it make sense to fence the garden with ZFS if the controller shows 1 block device and takes care of the data itself quite reliably?
And in general - is there any point in ZFS on such configurations? And if there is, how best to organize partitioning, if the main thing is the maximum available space?

Answer 1

In principle, if you have a good (read: reliable and honest) hardware controller, +bbu, there is no special need for ZFS. For all its flexibility, the soft-raid creates an extra load on the CPU and the bus; a good controller will calculate all the checksums by itself. Yes, and ZFS itself has limitations, for example, the inability to add new screws to raid-z / z2 pools (this particular one does not concern you, but it is often useful).
If the question was not “normal raid vs. zfs" and "ich10r vs. zfs", then the answer is definitely ZFS. :-)

Answer 2

ZFS is interesting for administration tools (snapshots, send-receive, pool growth on the go, and so on).
If none of this is needed, and the features of UFS on large file systems (long-hour fsck, for example) suit you, you can do without ZFS.
But if ZFS, then on JBOD. The option on top of HW RAID was strongly discouraged by dignity.

Answer 3

It is considered incorrect to use RAID when using ZFS. The controller is usually set to PassThrough mode in order to give disks to the OS on which ZFS will do what it needs.
ZFS is not affected by this www.raid-recovery-guide.com/raid5-write-hole.aspx

Answer 4

I will join danfe , there is no special point in ZFS, except to play around.

Answer 5

ZFS in terms of data reliability can be very, very ahead of many analogues of classic raids, but yes - there is no need and sense to build it on a hardware raid, absolutely none, moreover, it simply won’t work