> On 08/30/2012 12:07 PM, Anonymous wrote: > > Hi. I have a spare off the shelf consumer PC and was thinking about loading > > Solaris on it for a development box since I use Studio @work and like it > > better than gcc. I was thinking maybe it isn't so smart to use ZFS since it > > has only one drive. If ZFS detects something bad it might kernel panic and > > lose the whole system right? I realize UFS /might/ be ignorant of any > > corruption but it might be more usable and go happily on it's way without > > noticing? Except then I have to size all the partitions and lose out on > > compression etc. Any suggestions thankfully received. > > Simply set copies=2 and go on your merry way. Works for me and protects > you from bit rot.
That sounds interesting. How does ZFS implement that? Does it make sure to keep the pieces of the duplicate on different parts of the drive? > Even if you do decide to put a second drive in at a later time, just > remember, RAID is not a backup solution. I use deja-dup to backup my > important files daily to an off-site machine for that. Oh I realize that but this isn't a production machine just an unused lonely PC that could be running Solaris instead. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
