Richard Elling - PAE wrote:
Anantha N. Srirama wrote:
I'm glad you asked this question. We are currently expecting 3511
storage sub-systems for our servers. We were wondering about their
configuration as well. This ZFS thing throws a wrench in the old line
think ;-) Seriously, we now have to put on a new hat to figure out
the best way to leverage both the storage sub-system as well as ZFS.
[for the archives]
There is *nothing wrong* with treating ZFS like UFS when configuring
with LUNs
hosted on RAID arrays. It is true that you will miss some of the
self-healing
features of ZFS, but at least you will know when the RAID array has
munged your
data -- a feature missing on UFS and most other file systems.
Of you just offer ZFS multiple LUNs from the RAID array.
The issue is putting ZFS on a single LUN be it a disk in a JBOD or a LUN
offered from a HW RAID array. If someone goes wrong and the LUN becomes
inaccessible then ... blamo! You're toasted. If ZFS detects a data
inconsistency then it can't look to an other block for a mirrored copy,
ala ZFS mirror, or to a parity block, ala RAIDZ.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
