On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 14:05:57 +0100, Kaya Saman wrote: > It was my impression that ZFS doesn't actually format the disk as > stores data as raw information on the hard disk directly rather then > using an actual "file system" structure as such.
In worst... in ultra-worst abysmal inexpected exceptional and unbelievable narrow cases, when you don't have or can't access a backup (which you should have even when using ZFS), and you _need_ to do some forensic analysis on disks, ZFS seems to be a worse solution than UFS. On ZFS, you never can predict where the data will go. Add several disks to the problem, a combination of striping and mirroring mechanisms, and you will see that things start to become complicated. I do _not_ want to try to claim a "ZFS inferiority due to missing backups", but there may be occassions where (except performance), low-level file system aspects of UFS might be superior to using ZFS. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
