On Jul 31, 2009, at 20:00, Jason A. Hoffman wrote:
On Jul 31, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Brian wrote:
I must say this thread has also damaged the view I have of ZFS.
Ive been considering just getting a Raid 5 controller and going
the linux route I had planned on.
Thankfully, the zfs users who have never lost a pool do not spend
much time posting about their excitement at never losing a pool.
Otherwise this list would be even more overwelming.
I have not yet lost a pool, and this includes the one built on USB
drives which might be ignoring cache sync requests.
I have thousands and thousands and thousands of zpools. I started
collecting such zpools back in 2005. None have been lost.
Also a reminder that on-disk redundancy (RAID-5, 6, Z, etc.) is no
substitute for backups.
Your controller (or software RAID) can hose data in many circumstances
as well. CERN's study revealed a bug in the WD disk firmware (fixed in
a later version) interacting with their 3Ware controllers that caused
have caused 80% of the errors they experienced.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss