Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 02:26:29 +0200 (CEST) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> To: Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-freebsdhackers2.e313df@mired.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, xorquewasp@googlemail.com Subject: Re: Request for opinions - gvinum or ccd? Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0906010224050.27329@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> In-Reply-To: <20090531201408.45dd4334@bhuda.mired.org> References: <20090530175239.GA25604@logik.internal.network> <20090530144354.2255f722@bhuda.mired.org> <20090530191840.GA68514@logik.internal.network> <20090530162744.5d77e9d1@bhuda.mired.org> <A5BB2D2B836A4438B1B7BD8420FCC6A3@uk.tiscali.intl> <20090531201445.GA82420@logik.internal.network> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0905312355240.26545@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <0229B3BF1BE94C82AA11FD06CBE0BDEF@uk.tiscali.intl> <20090531235943.GA77374@logik.internal.network> <20090531201408.45dd4334@bhuda.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Disks, unlike software, sometimes fail. Using redundancy can help modern SATA drives fail VERY often. about 30% of drives i bought recently failed in less than a year. > both checksum on and copies > 1 on, and the latter isn't the > default. It's probably better to let zpool provide the redundancy via > a mirror or raid configuration than to let zfs do it anyway. ZFS copies are far from what i consider useful. for example you set copies=2. You write a file, and get 2 copies. Then one disk with one copy fails, then you put another, do resilver but ZFS DOES NOT rebuild second copy. You need to write a program that will just rewrite all files to make this.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0906010224050.27329>