"With ZFS however the in-between cache is obsolete, as individual disk
caches can be used directly."
The statement needs to be qualified.
Storage cache, if protected, works great to reduce critical
op latency. ZFS when it writes to disk cache, will flush
data out before return to
UNIX admin wrote:
This is simply not true. ZFS would protect against
the same type of
errors seen on an individual drive as it would on a
pool made of HW raid
LUN(s). It might be overkill to layer ZFS on top of a
LUN that is
already protected in some way by the devices internal
RAID code but i
Anton B. Rang wrote:
JBOD probably isn't dead, simply because motherboard manufacturers are unlikely to pay
the extra $10 it might cost to use a RAID-enabled chip rather than a plain chip (and
the cost is more if you add cache RAM); but basic RAID is at least cheap.
NVidia MCPs (later NForce
On Fri, 8 Sep 2006, Jim Sloey wrote:
> > Roch - PAE wrote:
> > The hard part is getting a set of simple requirements. As you go into
> > more complex data center environments you get hit with older Solaris
> > revs, other OSs, SOX compliance issues, etc. etc. etc. The world where
> > most of us se
Jim Sloey writes:
> > Roch - PAE wrote:
> > The hard part is getting a set of simple requirements. As you go into
> > more complex data center environments you get hit with older Solaris
> > revs, other OSs, SOX compliance issues, etc. etc. etc. The world where
> > most of us seem to be pl
Depends on the workload. (Did I miss that email?)
Peter Sundstrom wrote:
Hmm. Appears to be differing opinions.
Another way of putting my question is can anyone guarantee that ZFS will not
perform worse that UFS on the array?
High speed performance is not really an issue, hence the reason th
