Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:36:38 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org, delphij@delphij.net, Brian Candler <B.Candler@pobox.com> Subject: Re: Logical volume management Message-ID: <13727.1132414598@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:28:54 %2B0100." <20051119162854.2656096a@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20051119162854.2656096a@Magellan.Leidinger.net>, Alexander Leidinge r writes: >Not more than in the same situation with 2 or more "black boxes" >instead of one... :-) That's actually not true. A major part of the rationale for having the partitioning (ie: mount points) in the name space rather than the block layer is to allow the administrator to partition his data and thus limit calmity to the affected area. I'm not saying that the ZFS method doesn't have merits, but it certainly has costs. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?13727.1132414598>