> You know that you need a minimum of 2 disks to form a > (mirrored) pool > with ZFS? A pool with no redundancy is not a good > idea!
According to the slides I have seen, a ZFS filesystem even on a single disk can handle massive amounts of sector failure before it becomes unusable. I seem to recall it said 1/8th of the disk? So even on a single disk the redundancy in the metadata is valuable. And if I don't have really very much data I can set copies=2 so I have better protection for the data as well. My goal is a compact low-powered and low-maintenance widget. Eliminating the chance of fsck is always a good thing now that I have tasted ZFS. I'm going to try and see if Nevada will even install when it arrives, and report back. Perhaps BSD is another option. If not I will fall back to Ubuntu. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
