On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Gary Mills <mi...@cc.umanitoba.ca> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 11:35:40PM +0200, "C. Bergström" wrote: > > > > Here's more or less what I've collected... > > > [..] > > 10) Did I miss something.. > > I suppose my RFE for two-level ZFS should be included, unless nobody > intends to attach a ZFS file server to a SAN with ZFS on application > servers. > > -- > -Gary Mills- -Unix Support- -U of M Academic Computing and > Networking- > Although it seems your idea fell on a lot of deaf ears, I personally think it's a great one. It would give people a reason to use Solaris as their server OS of choice as well as their fileserver/storage appliance. It would also give them something NetApp doesn't have, instead of a bunch of me-too's (no, we don't need to start a flame-fest, it's my opinion, years of reading this list haven't changed it). As it stands, either you put your workload where the disks are, or you're wasting disk doing raid twice. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
