On Sep 16, 2009, at 7:17 PM, Ross Walker wrote:
more resilient to temporary path failures.
As another list member pointed out you could also avoid the issue by
having a raidz disk per controller. But if I'm buying that kind of
big iron I might just opt for a 3par or emc and save myself the
work, and probably some $ too.
In general, for SAS or SATA, having separate controllers does little
to improve
data availability. The reason is because SAS and SATA are point-to-point
or point-to-switch-to-point architectures and you don't have the
shared bus
issues that plague parallel SCSI or IDE. The controllers themselves are
approximately an order of magnitude more reliable than your CPU and are
around two orders of magnitude more reliable than your disk. Put your
redundancy where your reliability is weak (disk), if you want to improve
availability.
http://blogs.sun.com/relling/entry/zfs_raid_recommendations_space_vs
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
