>That's the dilemma, the array provides nice features like RAID1 and >RAID5, but those are of no real use when using ZFS.
RAID5 is not a "nice" feature when it breaks. A RAID controller cannot guarantee that all bits of a RAID5 stripe are written when power fails; then you have data corruption and no one can tell you what data was corrupted. ZFS RAIDZ can. >The advantages to use ZFS on such array are e.g. the sometimes huge >write cache available, use of consolidated storage and in SAN >configurations, cloning and sharing storage between hosts. Are huge write caches really a advantage? Or are you taking about huge write caches with non-volatile storage? >The price comes of course in additional administrative overhead (lots >of microcode updates, more components that can fail in between, etc). > >Also, in bigger companies there usually is a team of storage >specialist, that mostly do not know about the applications running on >top of it, or do not care... (like: "here you have your bunch of >gigabytes...") True enough .... Casper _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
