On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 03:44:08PM -0400, Miles Nordin wrote: > >>>>> "re" == Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > c> If that's really the excuse for this situation, then ZFS is > c> not ``always consistent on the disk'' for single-VDEV pools. > > re> I disagree with your assessment. The on-disk format (any > re> on-disk format) necessarily assumes no faults on the media. > > The media never failed, only the connection to the media. We've every > good reason to believe that every CDB that the storage controller > acknowledged as complete, was completed and is still there---and that > is the only statement which must be true of unfaulty media. We've no > strong reason to doubt it.
zdb should be able to pinpoint the problem, no? _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
