On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 09:09 +1000, Nathan Kroenert wrote: > On Tue, 2006-06-27 at 02:27, Gregory Shaw wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2006, at 1:15 AM, Mika Borner wrote: > > > > ><snip> What we need, would be the feature to use JBODs. > > > > > > > If you've got hardware raid-5, why not just run regular (non-raid) > > pools on top of the raid-5? > > > > I wouldn't go back to JBOD. Hardware arrays offer a number of > > advantages to JBOD: > > - disk microcode management > > - optimized access to storage > > - large write caches > > - RAID computation can be done in specialized hardware > > - SAN-based hardware products allow sharing of storage among > > multiple hosts. This allows storage to be utilized more effectively. > > How would ZFS self heal in this case? > > Nathan. > > > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
You're using hardware raid. The hardware raid controller will rebuild the volume in the event of a single drive failure. You'd need to keep on top of it, but that's a given in the case of either hardware or software raid. If you've got requirements for surviving an array failure, the recommended solution in that case is to mirror between volumes on multiple arrays. I've always liked software raid (mirroring) in that case, as no manual intervention is needed in the event of an array failure. Mirroring between discrete arrays is usually reserved for mission-critical applications that cost thousands of dollars per hour in downtime. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
