I think the problem for me is not that there's a risk of data loss if a pool becomes corrupt, but that there are no recovery tools available. With UFS, people expect that if the worst happens, fsck will be able to recover their data in most cases.
With ZFS you have no such tools, yet Victor has on at least two occasions shown that it's quite possible to recover pools that were completely unusable (I believe by making use of old / backup copies of the uberblock). My concern is that ZFS has all this information on disk, it has the ability to know exactly what is and isn't corrupted, and it should (at least for a system with snapshots) have many, many potential uberblocks to try. It should be far, far better than UFS at recovering from these things, but for a certain class of faults, when it hits a problem it just stops dead. That's what frustrates me - knowing that there's potential to have all my data there, stored safely away, but having it completely inaccessible due to a lack of recovery tools. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
