On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 02:19:05PM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Sat, 14 Jun 2008, Brian Wilson wrote: > > > What are the odds, in that configuration of zpool (no mirroring, > > just using the intelligent disk as concatenated luns in the zpool) > > that if we have this silent corruption, the whole zpool dies? If > > anyone knows, what's the comparative odds of the VxVM volume, UFS or > > VxFS filesystem similarly dying in the same scenario? > > I don't know the answer to that. Probably nobody knows the answer > since there is no formal research project to analyze it and no > automatic collection agent to report the data. You can scan the list > archives to find the zfs horror stories. Most of the "whole pool > died" horror stories are not due to data loss on a properly maintained > RAID array.
ZFS uses ditto blocks for meta-data. I think it would be really hard for silent corruptions to render a ZFS volume (even on a single disk with no RAID or mirroring) unless luck just wasn't on your side and both copies of your meta-data got corrupted. That being said, you can increase the number of ditto copies that are made (I think 2 is the default for meta-data and 1 is the default for data) and increase your chances of survival on a single disk system. -brian -- "Coding in C is like sending a 3 year old to do groceries. You gotta tell them exactly what you want or you'll end up with a cupboard full of pop tarts and pancake mix." -- IRC User (http://www.bash.org/?841435) _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
