Hi, When I read the ZFS manual, it usually recommends to configure redundancy at the ZFS layer, mainly because there are features that will work only with redundant configuration (like corrupted data correction), also it implies that the overall robustness will improve.
My question is simple, what is the recommended configuration on SAN (on high-end EMC, like the Symmetrix DMX series for example) where usually the redundancy is configured at the array level, so most likely we would use simple ZFS layout, without redundancy? Is it worth to move the redundancy from the SAN array layer to the ZFS layer? (configuring redundancy on both layers is sounds like a waste to me) There are certain advantages on the array to have redundancy configured (beyond the protection against simple disk failure). Can we compare the advantages of having (for example) RAID5 configured on a high-end SAN with no redundancy at the ZFS layer versus no redundant RAID configuration on the high-end SAN but having raidz or raidz2 on the ZFS layer? Any tests, experience or best practices regarding this topic? How does ZFS perform (from performance and robustness (or availability if you like) point of view) on high-end SANs, compared to a VSF for example? If you could share your experience with me, I would really appreciate that. Regards, sendai -- This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
