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

Reply via email to