>Dude, don't be so arrogant. Acting like you know what I'm talking about >better than I do. Face it that you have something to learn here.
You may say that, but then you post this: >> Why do you think that a "Snapshot" has a "better quality" than the last >> snapshot available? > >If you rollback to a snapshot from several minutes ago, you can rest assured >all the transaction groups that belonged to that snapshot have been >committed. So although you're losing the most recent few minutes of data, >you can rest assured you haven't got file corruption in any of the existing >files. But the actual fact is that there is *NO* difference between the last uberblock and an uberblock named as "snapshot-such-and-so". All changes made after the uberblock was written are discarded by rolling back. All the transaction groups referenced by "last uberblock" *are* written to disk. Disabling the ZIL makes sure that fsync() and sync() no longer work; whether you take a named snapshot or the uberblock is immaterial; your strategy will cause more data to be lost. Casper _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
