basically you would add ZFS redundancy level, if you want to be protected from silent data corruption (data corruption that could occur somewhere along the IO path)
- XP12000 has all the features to protect from hardware failure (no-SPOF) - ZFS has all the feature to protect from silent data corruption (no-SPOC C=corruption) this seems of over protection, but it's the price to pay when dealing with large amount of data nowadays selim -- ------------------------------------------------------ Blog: http://fakoli.blogspot.com/ On Dec 4, 2007 2:54 PM, Sean Parkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So, if your array is something big like an HP XP12000, you wouldn't just make > a zpool of one big LUN (LUSE volume), you'd split it in two and make a mirror > when creating the zpool? > > If the array has redundancy built in, you're suggesting to add another layer > of redundancy using ZFS on top of that? > > We're looking to use this in our environment. Just wanted some clarification. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > -- ------------------------------------------------------ Blog: http://fakoli.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
