I realize now I didn't answer with respect to the comparison to mirroring from fs(3). These fundamentally solve different problem, fs(3) mirror is for online disk mirroring. As in you have two drives in your machine and you want your machine to use both of them for redundant storage(think RAID). Where as venti/mirrorareans is designed for offline backups that are not always online. You boot up some slow big drive (or other media) and write your arenas to weekly/monthly/whatever. There really isn't much to compare between the two because the function they fit is entirely different from each other. It would be more interesting I think to compare the usefulness of this program as compared to venti/copy, since from a 50 ft view they seem to solve the same problem. I presume the reasoning here is mirrorarenas avoids the overhead of (potentially) running two instances of venti on the same machine to facilitate the duplication of data at a higher level.
I don't see the lack of response here as an issue, this original question hasn't even been up for 24 hours yet. I think its a bit silly to say that this is an unreasonable amount of time to wait for a proper answer. If someone wants to participate and wants to challenge their understanding by suggesting to others how they think things work, I see no problem. However I also do not think its unreasonable for people to be upset at objectively false (and easily verifiable) information. ------------------------------------------ 9fans: 9fans Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tca0eb0fbb2404e31-M3964b6785aa4767916a02f18 Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription
