>>>>> "re" == Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com> writes:
    >> Remember when I said the SAN corruption issue was not
    >> root-caused?

    re> If your SAN corrupts data, how can you blame ZFS?

(a) the fault has not been isolated to the SAN.

    Reading some pretty-printed message from ZFS saying ``it's not my
    fault it's his fault'' is not the same as isolating the problem.
    especially since all the ZFS error messages say that.

But, rather than ``blame'' maybe I could say less-loadedly ``suggest
opportunity for improvement in''?

(b) other filesystems have less problems with the same SAN's.  so,
    even if the fault is in the SAN, which is not known yet, the work
    for ZFS is not finished.  We need one or probably both of the
    following:

    (1) to discover what is the actual problem, even if it turns out
        to be with the SAN.  If the problem is not with the SAN,
        great, fix it.  If it is, how can we test for it to qualify a
        SAN as not having the problem, other than waiting for lost
        pools which is a non-answer.

        This is called ``integration''---I thought everyone was a fan
        of it!

    (2) either a fix or workaround so ZFS works better with the
        equipment we actually have available

It's not the first time I've made either point.  surprised it's still
being denied since I thought James was working on (b)(2) but I think
people who piped up (including me) were just curious if something else
had been found, silently finished.  You made it sound pretty
unambigiously like ``yes'' when you said the problem does not exist
any more, but I think the real answer is ``no, it has not been
silently finished'' since James began his work long after failmode was
finished.  

It's frustrating to keep going in circles.  Also I think advising
people they no longer need to avoid single-LUN SAN pools is a bad
idea.  And blaming the SAN problems in silent bit-flips when it looks
pretty clearly that they actually lie elsewhere is dishonest and
contributes to a widening credibility gap.

Attachment: pgppFL0MZfUce.pgp
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to