Ok, Torrey, I like you, so one more comment before I go to bed -- Please go study the EMC NetWorker 7.5, and why EMC can claim leadership in VSS support. Then, if you still don't understand the importance of VSS, just ask me in an open fashion, I will teach you.
The importance of storage in system and application optimization can be very significant. You do coding, do you know what's TGT from IBM in COBOL, to be able to claim "enterprise technology"? If not, please study. http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/pdthelp/v1r1/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.entcobol.doc_4.1/PGandLR/ref/rpbug10.htm Open Storage is a great concept, but we can only win with realy advantages, not fake marketing lines. I hope everyone enjoyed the discussion. I did. zStorageAnalyst ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torrey McMahon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Joseph Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Richard Elling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William D. Hathaway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 2:40 AM Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Hardware Raid Vs ZFS implementation on Sun X4150/X4450 > Compared to hw raid only snapshots ZFS is still, imho, easier to use. > > If you start talking about VSS, aka shadow copy for Windows, you're now at > the fs level. I can see that VSS offers an API for 3rd parties to use but, > as I literally just started reading about it, I'm not an expert. From a > quick glance I think the ZFS feature set is comparable. Is there a C++ API > to ZFS? Not that I know of. Do you need one? Can't think of a reason off > the top of my head given the way the zpool/zfs commands work. > > Joseph Zhou wrote: >> Torrey, now this impressive as the old days with Sun Storage. >> >> Ok, ZFS PiT is only a software solution. >> The Windows VSS is not only a software solution, but also a 3rd party >> integration standard from MS. >> What's your comment on ZFS PiT is better than MS PiT, in light of >> openness and 3rd-party integration??? >> >> Talking about garbage! >> z >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Torrey McMahon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "Richard Elling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: "Joseph Zhou" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "William D. Hathaway" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >> <zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 1:58 AM >> Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Hardware Raid Vs ZFS implementation on Sun >> X4150/X4450 >> >> >>> Richard Elling wrote: >>>> Joseph Zhou wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yeah? >>>>> http://www.adaptec.com/en-US/products/Controllers/Hardware/sas/value/SAS-31605/_details/Series3_FAQs.htm >>>>> Snapshot is a big deal? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Snapshot is a big deal, but you will find most "hardware" RAID >>>> implementations >>>> are somewhat limited, as the above adaptec only supports 4 snapshots >>>> and it is an >>>> optional feature. You will find many array vendors will be happy to >>>> charge lots >>>> of money for the snapshot feature. >>> >>> On top of that since the ZFS snapshot is at the file system level it's >>> much easier to use. You don't have to quiesce the file system first or >>> hope that when you take the snapshot you get a consistent data set. I've >>> seen plenty of folks take hw raid snapshots without locking the file >>> system first, let alone quiescing the app, and getting garbage. >> >> > _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
