As for ZFS being dangerous, we have a score of drive-years with no loss of data. The lack of fsck is considered in this intelligently written piece
you are just lucky.
before i would start using anything new in such important part as filesystem, i do extreme test, ssimulate hardware faults, random overwrites etc.
I did it for ZFS not once, and it fails miserably ending with unrecoverable filesystem that - at best - is without data in some subdirectory. at worst - that crashes at mount and are inaccessible forever.
under FFS the worst thing i can get is loss of overwritten data only. overwritten inode - lost file. overwrite data blocks - overwritten files. nothing more!
what i don't talk about is ZFS performance which is just terribly bad, except some few special cases when it is slightly faster than UFS+softupdates.
It is even worse with RAID-5 style layout which ZFS do "better" with RAID-Z.
Better=random read performance of single drive. _______________________________________________ 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"
