Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:02:52 +0200 From: Matthias Gamsjager <mgamsjager@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is ZFS production ready? Message-ID: <AA485AA5-F3F8-4D02-8F59-05AC76172C40@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211707570.3361@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <4FE2CE38.9000100@gmail.com> <CAPj0R5Kmi-%2BdJ7mPvTrTAoS8O983svOyR2WyK2_v1Cr07dSS_A@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211413140.2263@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2BD9QhuQ%2BbxKW9%2BdX%2BzS9mErwz8JSkV2G7qL0KfB8BH_LGJAgA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211539230.2903@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2BD9QhvR_eKtVxdKcaMyOS7tLw_AOHKgUy3o7mJn2b=chMA0Xw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211619250.3092@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2BD9QhvwKZm7heoe7tpfhYCJvkknw_HC7aFjCu%2B-1xYQBmV6ng@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211644350.3170@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <CA%2BD9QhsyOh34SghWzQPpnTig%2BUmSEO2VP7jfPxTXs9zW9Uakeg@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206211707570.3361@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 21 jun. 2012, at 17:15, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> w= rote: >>=20 >> I do understand your setup but I dont have too agree that it is a good >=20 > so i would repeat my question. > Assume you have 48 disks, in mirrored configuration (24 mirrors) and 480 u= sers with their data on them. >=20 > Your solution with ZFS - ZFS crashes or you get double disk failure. > Assuming the latter by average one per 24 file (randomly chosen) is destro= yed which - in practice and limited time, means everything destroyed. Actual= ly more than one per 24 - large files can be spread over. >=20 > Your solution with UFS - better as there is fsck which slowly but successf= ully repairs problem. with double disk failure - the same! >=20 >=20 > You restore everything from backup (i assume you have one). This takes lik= e a day or more, one or two complete work days lost+all users in practice lo= st everything since last backup. >=20 > My solution with UFS - fsck in case of failure work in parallel on 24 disk= s so not that long. double disk failure means losing data of 1/24 users. >=20 > every one per 24 user cannot work, others work and i without any stress do= recover this 1/24 of users data from backup after putting replacement disks= . >=20 > 1/24 of users lost data since last backup, and some hours of time. >=20 >=20 > Even assuming ZFS is perfect then we both have problems as often, but my p= roblems are 1/24 as severe as yours. >=20 >=20 > Just don't ask me for help when unhappy users will want to cut off your he= ad. >=20 >>> And you've never seen me, yet i still exist. >>>=20 >>=20 >> Really? that's you anwser to my question. The most childish answer I coul= d >=20 > stupid answer to stupid question. > You never seen - but they do happens. In other topic you hammerd on fact and if someone ask you to deliver them i= ts a stupid question.=20 And about the dram error. I really hope you do use ecc memory in production w= hich renders your scenario invalide. And even then its a claim made by you s= ome random dude on a list.=20 Without proper test scenario and documentation such claims are just useless.= =20 And a proper layout zfs will withstand a double disk failure with zero downt= ime...where younhave to tell your customer they just lost a day work=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?AA485AA5-F3F8-4D02-8F59-05AC76172C40>