Shouldn't there be a big warning when configuring a pool with no redundancy and/or should that not require a -f flag ?
-r Al Hopper writes: > On Sun, 17 Dec 2006, Ricardo Correia wrote: > > > On Friday 15 December 2006 20:02, Dave Burleson wrote: > > > Does anyone have a document that describes ZFS in a pure > > > SAN environment? What will and will not work? > > > > > > From some of the information I have been gathering > > > it doesn't appear that ZFS was intended to operate > > > in a SAN environment. > > > > This might answer your question: > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zfs/faq/#hardwareraid > > The section entitled "Does ZFS work with SAN-attached devices?" does not > make it clear the (some would say) dire effects of not having pool > redundancy. I think that FAQ should clearly spell out the downside; i.e., > where ZFS will "say" (Sorry Charlie) "pool is corrupt". > > A FAQ should always emphasize the real-world downsides to poor decisions > made by the reader. Not delivering "bad news" does the reader a > dis-service IMHO. > > Regards, > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
