Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Fri, 8 May 2009, Miles Nordin wrote:
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.
Miles,
Maybe I was not paying attention or maybe my SPAM filter is
over-aggressive since I seem to have lost track of the discussion.
Could you remind us of the problem you are trying to solve? Has
anyone else but yourself encountered it?
If I may speak for Miles, he's pining for the forensics tool to replace
the current, manual method for attempting to recover a borked pool
by using old metadata. He's also concerned that people trust their
SAN too much. I agree, it is best if ZFS can manage data redundancy.
You will find similar recommendations in the appropriate docs.
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
