From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 9 15:09:46 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7D28106564A for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:09:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mgamsjager@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vb0-f54.google.com (mail-vb0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 797368FC0A for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 15:09:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbmv11 with SMTP id v11so632547vbm.13 for ; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 08:09:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=BJfiICzYBKNUH45HxeB0vsuwvLlI/moBHyIihscDneI=; b=LqMhfE8Qi2QbQGwBXzP2fkgKMueQuUnd43oY5P/Iu6cOTyWfOSvC0dp9JzSX3i+ngN /uD8V3dEAaLTVPawfzh3U00ddDGzT72DdvNMalTmypWskW2OgTGLNEPEYBFv70TpPIfl jIFtPRli/rwITmSk7nOBrvuaUtH/UGjk/skExtke+8oDdME3A2njJIn1xb/g1vcW9FF/ OlREcKm+WIN6O97tNxYwRwgr0OLMspP2wezlh2JWKZe9XFHAE0z89LBzWZrrnau9pWvW wuD5vF06CxgYGX4UMJHprw2wfIuf4F0gedQr3EGcyKu5Fua9sDsf4zWHb3f9X7LrTP1T R6EA== Received: by 10.52.72.79 with SMTP id b15mr15019953vdv.13.1344524985734; Thu, 09 Aug 2012 08:09:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.128.204 with HTTP; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 08:09:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <793d6519ca3648de7634faff1829b9f7@remailer.privacy.at> <5021641E.4030206@une.net.co> <5022104D.8070402@infracaninophile.co.uk> From: Matthias Gamsjager Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2012 17:09:14 +0200 Message-ID: To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Subject: Re: compare zfs xfs and jfs o X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 15:09:46 -0000 On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Wojciech Puchar < wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote: > Needing fsck because the drive is failing and not able to store and >> retrieve data reliably any more is a whole different thing. >> > > or bad data stored because of non-disk errors. > > > in this case any filesystem will store the wrong data. This has little to do with ZFS. Beside in production one should run with ECC memory to eliminate the possibility of incorrect data from memory