> > > One of the benefits of ZFS is that not only is head synchronization
not
> > > needed, but also block offsets do not have to be the same. For
example,
> > > in a traditional mirror, block 1 on device 1 is paired with block 1
on
> > > device 2. In ZFS, this 1:1 mapping is not required. I believe this
will
> > > result in ZFS being more resilient to disks with multiple block
failures.
> > > In order for a traditional RAID to implement this, it would basically
> > > need to [re]invent a file system.
> > > -- richard
> >
> > This does not seem to be enforced (! 1:1) in code anywhere that I
can
> > see. By not required are you pointing that this is able to be done in
the
> > future, or is this the case right now and I am missing the code that
> > accomplishes this?
>
> I think he means that if a block fails to write on a VDEV, ZFS can write
> that data elsewhere and is not forced to use that location. As opposed
> to SVM as an example, where the mirror must try to write at a particular
> offset or fail.
Understood, I am asking if the current code base actually does this as I
do not see the code path that deals with this case.
-Wade
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
