From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun  1 12:37:41 2012
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 05A24106566C
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri,  1 Jun 2012 12:37:41 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [89.206.35.99])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614738FC20
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>;
	Fri,  1 Jun 2012 12:37:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q51CbcmH037011;
	Fri, 1 Jun 2012 14:37:38 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Received: from localhost (wojtek@localhost)
	by wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id
	q51Cbbkd037008; Fri, 1 Jun 2012 14:37:37 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl)
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 14:37:37 +0200 (CEST)
From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
To: Kaya Saman <kayasaman@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPj0R5+LcKUGijT17W6RXBz_KQxz5nZYP0vfPY3HNxNEyw0Eaw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1206011435430.20357@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
References: <CACxnZKM__Lt9LMabyUC_HOCg2zsMT=3bpqwVrGj16py1A=qffg@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1206011048010.2497@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
	<CAPj0R5+LcKUGijT17W6RXBz_KQxz5nZYP0vfPY3HNxNEyw0Eaw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
	(wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl [127.0.0.1]);
	Fri, 01 Jun 2012 14:37:38 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Oscar Hodgson <oscar.hodgson@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Anyone using freebsd ZFS for large storage servers?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:37:41 -0000

>> Assuming that filesystem doesn't need offline filesystem check utility
>> because it "never crash" is funny.
>>
>
> zfs scrub...???

when starting means crash quickly?
Well.. no.

Certainly with computers that never have hardware faults and assuming ZFS 
doesn't have any software bugs you may be right.

But in real world you will be hardly punished some day ;)

> Additionally ZFS works directly at the block level of the HD meaning
> that it is slightly different to the 'normal' file systems in storing
> information and is also "self healing"......

doesn't other filesystem work on block level too? if no - then at what 
level?