Nicolas Dorfsman wrote:
We need to think ZFS as ZFS, and not as a new filesystem ! I mean, the whole concept is different.
Agreed.
So. What could be the best architecture ?
What is the problem?
With UFS, I used to have separate metadevices/LUNs for each application. With ZFS, I thought it would be nice to use a separate pool for each application.
Ick. It would be much better to have one pool, and a separate filesystem for each application.
But, it means multiply snapshot backing-store OR dynamically remove/add this space/LUN to pool where we need to do backups.
I don't understand this statement. What problem are you trying to solve? If you want to do backups, simply take a snapshot, then point your backup program at it. If you want faster incremental backups, use 'zfs send -i' to generate the file to backup.
--matt _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
