Al Hopper wrote:
On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote:
Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most
unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to
corrupt your data?
Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above.
However, ZFS is no substitute for bad practices that include:
- not proactively replacing mechanical components *before* they fail
There's a nice side benefit from this one:
- the piece of hardware you retire becomes a backup of "old data"
When I ran lots of older SPARC boxes, I made a point of upgrading
the disks, from 1GB to 4G to 9GB...it was't for disk space but to
put in place newer, quieter, faster, less power hungry drives and
had the added benefit of ensuring that in 2004, the SCA SCSI drive
in the SPARC 5 was made maybe 1 or 2 years ago, not 10 and thus
also less likely to fail. I still try to do this with PC hard drives today,
but sometimes they fail inside my replacement window :-(
Darren
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
