On 27-Aug-08, at 7:21 PM, Ian Collins wrote: > Miles Nordin writes: > >> >> In addition, I'm repeating myself like crazy at this point, but ZFS >> tools used for all pools like 'zpool status' need to not freeze >> when a >> single pool, or single device within a pool, is unavailable or slow, >> and this expectation is having nothing to do with failmode on the >> failing pool. And NFS running above ZFS should continue serving >> filesystems from available pools even if some pools are faulted, >> again >> nothing to do with failmode. >> > I agree with the bulk of this post, but I'd like to add to this > last point. > I've had a few problems with ZFS tools hanging on recent builds due to > problems with a pool on a USB stick. One tiny $20 component > causing a fault > that required a reboot of the host. This really shouldn't happen.
Let's not be too quick to assign blame, or to think that perfecting the behaviour is straightforward or even possible. Traditionally, systems bearing 'enterprisey' expectations were/are integrated hardware and software from one vendor (e.g. Sun) which could be certified as a unit. Start introducing 'random $20 components' and you begin to dilute the quality and predictability of the composite system's behaviour. If hard drive firmware is as cr*ppy as anecdotes indicate, what can we really expect from a $20 USB pendrive? --Toby > > Ian > > _______________________________________________ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
