I would be intrested in how to roll-back to certain txg-points in case of disaster, that was what Russel was after anyway.
Yours Markus Kovero -----Original Message----- From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Miles Nordin Sent: 19. heinäkuuta 2009 11:24 To: zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] Another user looses his pool (10TB) in this case and 40 days work >>>>> "bj" == Brent Jones <br...@servuhome.net> writes: bj> many levels of fail here, pft. Virtualbox isn't unstable in any of my experience. It doesn't by default pass cache flushes from guest to host unless you set VBoxManage setextradata VMNAME "VBoxInternal/Devices/piix3ide/0/LUN#[x]/Config/IgnoreFlush" 0 however OP does not mention the _host_ crashing, so this questionable ``optimization'' should not matter. Yanking the guest's virtual cord is something ZFS is supposed to tolerate: remember the ``crash-consistent backup'' concept (not to mention the ``always consistent on disk'' claim, but really any filesystem even without that claim should tolerate having the guest's virtual cord yanked, or the guest's kernel crashing, without losing all its contents---the claim only means no time-consuming fsck after reboot). bj> to blame ZFS seems misplaced, -1 The fact that it's a known problem doesn't make it not a problem. bj> the subject on this thread especially inflammatory. so what? _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
