On Fri, 4 May 2007, mike wrote: > Isn't the benefit of ZFS that it will allow you to use even the most > unreliable risks and be able to inform you when they are attempting to > corrupt your data?
Yes - I won't argue that ZFS can be applied exactly as you state above. However, ZFS is no substitute for bad practices that include: - not proactively replacing mechanical components *before* they fail - not having maintenance policies in place > To me it sounds like he is a SOHO user; may not have a lot of funds to > go out and swap hardware on a whim like a company might. You may be right - but you're simply guessing. The original system probably cost around $3k (?? I could be wrong). So what I'm suggesting, that he spend ~ $300, represents ~ 10% of the original system cost. Since the OP asked for advice, I've given him the best advice I can come up with. I've also encountered many users who don't keep up to date with current computer hardware capabilities and pricing, and who may be completely unaware that you can purchase two 500Gb disk drives, with a 5 year warranty, for around $300. And possibly less if you checkout Frys weekly bargin disk drive offers. Now consider the total cost of ownership solution I recommended: 500 gigabytes of storage, coupled with ZFS, which translates into $60/year for 5 years of error free storage capability. Can life get any better than this! :) Now contrast my recommendation with what you propose - re-targeting a bunch of older disk drives, which incorporate older, less reliable technology, with a view to saving money. How much is your time worth? How many hours will it take you to recover from a failure of one of these older drives and the accompying increased risk of data loss. If the ZFS savvy OP comes back to this list and says "Als' solution is too expensive" I'm perfectly willing to rethink my recommendation. For now, I believe it to be the best recommendation I can devise. > ZFS in my opinion is well-suited for those without access to > continuously upgraded hardware and expensive fault-tolerant > hardware-based solutions. It is ideal for home installations where > people think their data is safe until the disk completely dies. I > don't know how many non-savvy people I have helped over the years who > has no data protection, and ZFS could offer them at least some > fault-tolerance and protection against corruption, and could help > notify them when it is time to shut off their computer and call > someone to come swap out their disk and move their data to a fresh > drive before it's completely failed... Agreed. One piece-of-the-puzzle that's missing right now IMHO, is a reliable, two port, low-cost PCI SATA disk controller. A solid/de-bugged 3124 driver would go a long way to ZFS-enabling a bunch of cost-constrained ZFS users. And, while I'm working this hardware wish list, please ... a PCI-Express based version of the SuperMicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 8-port Marvell based disk controller card. Sun ... are you listening? > - mike > > > On 5/4/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 4 May 2007, Lee Fyock wrote: > > > > > Hi-- > > > > > > I'm looking forward to using zfs on my Mac at some point. My desktop > > > server (a dual-1.25GHz G4) has a motley collection of discs that has > > > accreted over the years: internal EIDE 320GB (boot drive), internal > > > 250, 200 and 160 GB drives, and an external USB 2.0 600 GB drive. > > > > > > My guess is that I won't be able to use zfs on the boot 320 GB drive, > > > at least this year. I'd like to favor available space over > > > performance, and be able to swap out a failed drive without losing > > > any data. > > > > > > So, what's the best zfs configuration in this situation? The FAQs > > > I've read are usually related to matched (in size) drives. > > > > Seriously, the best solution here is to discard any drive that is 3 years > > (or more) old[1] and purchase two new SATA 500Gb drives. Setup the new > > drives as a zfs mirror. Being a believer in diversity, I'd recommend the > > following two products (one of each): > > > > - Western Digital Caviar RE2 WD5000YS 500GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA > > 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive [2] > > - Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 (Perpendicular Recording) ST3500630AS 500GB > > 7200 RPM 16MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive > > > > Not being familiar with Macs - I'm not sure about your availability of > > SATA ports on the motherboard. > > > > [1] it continues to amaze me that many sites, large or small, don't have a > > (written) policy for mechanical component replacement - whether disk > > drives or fans. > > [2] $151 at zipzoomfly.com > > [3] $130 at newegg.com > > > > Regards, > > > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT > > OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ > > _______________________________________________ > > zfs-discuss mailing list > > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > > > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
