On Thu, 31 Dec 2009, R.G. Keen wrote:
I'm in full overthink/overresearch mode on this issue, preparatory
to ordering disks for my OS/zfs NAS build. So bear with me. I've
been reading manuals and code, but it's hard for me to come up to
speed on a new OS quickly.
The question(s) underlying this thread seem to be:
(1) Does zfs raidz/raidz2/etc have the same issue with long recovery
times as RAID5? That being dropping a drive from the array because
it experiences an error and recovery that lasts longer than the
controller (zfs/OS/device driver stack in this case) waits for an
error message?
and
(2) Can non "raid edition" drives be set to have shorter error recovery for
raid use?
I like the nice and short answer from this "Bob Friesen" fellow the
best. :-)
I have heard that some vendor's drives can be re-flashed or set to use
short timeouts. Some vendors don't like this so they are trying to
prohibit it or doing so may invalidate the warranty.
Unless things have changed (since a couple of years ago when I last
looked), there are some vendors (e.g. Seagate) who offer "enterprise"
SATA drives with only a small surcharge over astonishingly similar
desktop SATA drives. The only actual difference seems to be the
firmware which is loaded on the drive. Check out the Barracuda ES.2
series.
It does not really matter what Solaris or ZFS does if the drive
essentially locks up when it is trying to recover a bad sector.
Bob
--
Bob Friesenhahn
bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
