On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 12:20:36PM -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > I'll chime in here with feeling uncomfortable with such a huge ZFS pool, > and also with my discomfort of the ZFS-over-ISCSI-on-ZFS approach. There > just seem to be too many moving parts depending on each other, any one of > which can make the entire pool unavailable.
But does it work well enough? It may be faster than NFS if there's only one client for each volume (unless you have fast slog devices for the ZIL). And it'd have better semantics too (e.g., no need for the client and server to agree on identities/domains). Nico -- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
