Darren J Moffat wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> As others have noted, the COW nature of ZFS means that there is a
>>> good chance that on a mostly-empty pool, previous data is still intact
>>> long after you might think it is gone. A utility to recover such data is
>>> (IMHO) more likely
| As others have noted, the COW nature of ZFS means that there is a good
| chance that on a mostly-empty pool, previous data is still intact long
| after you might think it is gone.
In the cases I am thinking of I am sure that the data was there.
Kernel panics just didn't let me get at it. Fortun
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> As others have noted, the COW nature of ZFS means that there is a
>> good chance that on a mostly-empty pool, previous data is still intact
>> long after you might think it is gone. A utility to recover such data is
>> (IMHO) more likely to be in the category of forensic
>
> As others have noted, the COW nature of ZFS means that there is a
> good chance that on a mostly-empty pool, previous data is still intact
> long after you might think it is gone. A utility to recover such data is
> (IMHO) more likely to be in the category of forensic analysis than
> a mount (
Chris Siebenmann wrote:
> I'm not Anton Rang, but:
> | How would you describe the difference between the data recovery
> | utility and ZFS's normal data recovery process?
>
> The data recovery utility should not panic my entire system if it runs
> into some situation that it utterly cannot handle
