Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Dec 2, 2006, at 10:56 AM, Al Hopper wrote:
On Sat, 2 Dec 2006, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Dec 2, 2006, at 6:01 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While other file systems, when they become corrupt, allow you to
salvage data :-)
They allow you to salvage what you *think* is your data.
But in reality, you have no clue what the disks are giving you.
I stand by what I said. If you have a massive disk failure, yes.
You are right.
When you have subtle corruption, some of the data and meta data is
bad but not all. In that case you can recover (and verify the data
if you have the means to do so) t he parts that did not get
corrupted. My ZFS experience so far is that it basically said the
whole 20GB pool was dead and I seriously doubt all 20GB was corrupted.
That was because you built a pool with no redundancy. In the case where
ZFS does not have a redundant config from which to try to reconstruct the
data (today) it simply says: sorry charlie - you pool is corrupt.
Where a RAID system would still be salvageable.
That is a comparison of apples to oranges. The RAID system has Redundancy. If
the ZFS pool had been configured with redundancy, it would have fared at least as
well as the RAID system.
Without redundancy, neither of them can magically reconstruct data. The RAID
system would simply be an AID system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff VICTOR Sun Microsystems jeff.victor @ sun.com
OS Ambassador Sr. Technical Specialist
Solaris 10 Zones FAQ: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/zones/faq
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
