# Best practices relative to reliability checks? Lately?

**URL:** <https://kopia.discourse.group/t/best-practices-relative-to-reliability-checks-lately/3871>\
**Category:** General Topics\
**Created:** [April 5, 2025, 6:29pm UTC](https://kopia.discourse.group/t/best-practices-relative-to-reliability-checks-lately/3871 "2025-04-05T18:29:32Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 13

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![97b4958b055b](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/9/47e85d/32.png) [@97b4958b055b](https://kopia.discourse.group/u/97b4958b055b)\
**Post date:** [April 7, 2025, 11:05pm UTC](https://kopia.discourse.group/t/best-practices-relative-to-reliability-checks-lately/3871/13 "2025-04-07T23:05:07Z")

</div>

You’ll have no trouble adapting to Debian then. That’s what Canonical forks, then adulterates to then end up calling _Ubuntu._

> [@Linwood](#):
>
> […] interest and free time is not really there unless it’s useful (or usefully an improvement) for me.

Well, that’s be ZFS then. It’s as battle tested as it gets. I wasn’t kidding in stating it automatically recovers when encountering corrupted blocks… & I was even ignorant to that it too supports `blake3`:

> **[Checksums and Their Use in ZFS — OpenZFS documentation](https://openzfs.github.io/openzfs-docs/Basic%20Concepts/Checksums.html)**

 ![yo-dawg-meme](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/free1/uploads/kopia/original/2X/7/735fbf80eaf1a1cd638d22eec256962cb2db98e0.png)

---

_[View the full topic](https://kopia.discourse.group/t/best-practices-relative-to-reliability-checks-lately/3871)._