A filesystem should be able to last for decades (HFS was designed thirty years ago); I regard not having checksums in a brand new filesystem an over-optimistic tradeoff.
A filesystem should be able to last for decades (HFS was designed thirty years ago); I regard not having checksums in a brand new filesystem an over-optimistic tradeoff.
Edit: macOS disk images do have a checksum of the whole image data though. The issue mentioned in the article seems to be caused by an oversight in the disk image helper app, rather than in the APFS filesystem itself.
[0] http://lists.dragonflybsd.org/pipermail/commits/2016-June/50...
It wasn't an oversight; it was a deliberate design decision.
Others replies have noted that maybe it was a performance issue, etc. But I think it's something much different. The real reason is that there is more downside than upside to reporting these errors.
Users would be very upset if iOS told them that there was a bad block in one of their precious selfies from last month. But they might not even notice or care about a few bad pixels in the image itself.
I'm just telling you what one big probable rationalization was for this decision. I'd personally want to know, but people on HN aren't "average" IOS users.