It all depends on the circumstances and requirements: (small) business application or some home-build NAS?
In your case, how much does it matter that some node experiences bitrot, and how big are those risks?
For our use, bit rot is pretty low risk. We have tooling to catch corrupted files (and it happens surprisingly rarely). We don't care about any of the raid like features (if a drive dies, we tell clients to get their video elsewhere).
For our use case, ZFS would be attractive mainly because of the ability to keep metadata in the L2 ARC. One of our bigger sources of P99 latency is uncached metadata reads from mechanical drives. Our FS guys are currently solving that problem in other ways.
Kind of: their edge-cache appliances run FreeBSD. IIRC they run Linux on their Amazon cloud for all their 'internal' stuff.
If you do some searches there's some good presentations on their work on getting encrypted streaming to go Very Fast:
* https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Netflix-...
* https://2019.eurobsdcon.org/talk-speakers/#numa
* https://netflixtechblog.com/serving-100-gbps-from-an-open-co...
This is because ZFS is cached by the ARC, not the normal page cache. ARC is weird, and operates in 8K blocks (like sparc page size), rather than 4K pages. Zero-copy things like sendfile depend on referencing pages in the page cache, and have never been adapted to deal with ARC. So making sendfile zero-copy with ZFS is a hard project that would involve either teaching ARC to "loan" pages to sendfile, or ripping out ARC caching from ZFS and making it use the same page cache that all other filesystems use.