Nice article. Short answer is yes, ZFS will heal a file regardless of size or level of activity on it, then.
Not only that, but it would be a recommended configuration if you want to *rule out* bitrot/corruption for the the likes of "Need help /tips SQLITE_CONSTRAINT: abort at 42" (this mail list). - Paul On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Kees Nuyt <k.n...@zonnet.nl> wrote: > [Default] On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 05:02:40 -0400, Paul Hammant > <p...@hammant.org> wrote: > > > ZFS, Btrfs could repair a Fossil database inflight, and without hiccup? > > Tell me a little more - it would repair sectors, blocks, segments of the > > whole Fossil image? Or the whole image? It seems that replacing the > whole > > image would be wrong, and replacing sectors/blocks/segments/sections > would > > be impossible if you want Fossil to not be corrupt in some other way. I > > wrote that because "data being checksummed" is ambiguous. > > Please read: > > https://blogs.oracle.com/timc/entry/demonstrating_zfs_self_healing > or any other article on ZFS and self healing. > > -- > Regards, > > Kees Nuyt > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
