First of all, I would like to thank Bob, Richard and Tim for at least taking time to look at this proposal and responding ;)
It is also encouraging to see that 2 of 3 responders consider this idea at least worth pondering and discussng, as it appeals to their direct interest. Even Richard was not dismissive of it ;) Finally, as Tim was right to note, I am not a kernel developer (and won't become one as good as those present on this list). Of course, I could "pull the blanket onto my side" and say that I'd try to write that code myself... but it would probably be a long wait, like that for "BP rewrite" - because, I already have quite a few commitments and responsibilities as an admin and recently as a parent (yay!) So, I guess, my piece of the pie is currently limited to RFEs and bug reports... and working in IT for a software development company, I believe (or hope) that's not a useless part of the process ;) I do believe that ZFS technology is amazing - despite some shortcomings that are still present - and I do want to see it flourish... ASAP! :^) //Jim 2012-01-08 7:15, Tim Cook wrote:
On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 7:37 PM, Richard Elling <richard.ell...@gmail.com <mailto:richard.ell...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Jim, On Jan 6, 2012, at 3:33 PM, Jim Klimov wrote: > Hello all, > > I have a new idea up for discussion. >
...
I disagree. Dedicated spares impact far more than availability. During a rebuild performance is, in general, abysmal. ... If I can't use the system due to performance being a fraction of what it is during normal production, it might as well be an outage. > I don't think I've seen such idea proposed for ZFS, and > I do wonder if it is at all possible with variable-width > stripes? Although if the disk is sliced in 200 metaslabs > or so, implementing a spread-spare is a no-brainer as well. Put some thoughts down on paper and work through the math. If it all works out, let's implement it! -- richard I realize it's not intentional Richard, but that response is more than a bit condescending. If he could just put it down on paper and code something up, I strongly doubt he would be posting his thoughts here. He would be posting results. The intention of his post, as far as I can tell, is to perhaps inspire someone who CAN just write down the math and write up the code to do so. Or at least to have them review his thoughts and give him a dev's perspective on how viable bringing something like this to ZFS is. I fear responses like "the code is there, figure it out" makes the *aris community no better than the linux one. > > What do you think - can and should such ideas find their > way into ZFS? Or why not? Perhaps from theoretical or > real-life experience with such storage approaches? > > //Jim Klimov As always, feel free to tell me why my rant is completely off base ;) --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss