Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 13 Feb 2021 17:51:14 +0100
From:      Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org>
To:        Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Reading a corrupted file on ZFS
Message-ID:  <225e4da5-79ec-a57a-90e5-35989e6484d5@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <5aa03138-1dc8-5a9c-1be6-d47ed22fc0cf@denninger.net>
References:  <da892eeb-233f-551f-2faa-62f42c3c1d5b@artem.ru> <0ca45adf-8f60-a4c3-6264-6122444a3ffd@denninger.net> <899c6b4f-2368-7ec2-4dfe-fa09fab35447@artem.ru> <20210212165216.2f613482@fabiankeil.de> <10977ffc-f806-69dd-0cef-d4fd4fc5f649@artem.ru> <2f82f113-9ca1-99a9-a433-89e3ae5edcbe@denninger.net> <2bf4f69c-9d5d-5ff9-0daa-c87515437ca3@artem.ru> <5aa03138-1dc8-5a9c-1be6-d47ed22fc0cf@denninger.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--uHKKMmNIODgVzi0bd1D7Ukk51iUrmlja9
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="UPHcda4tR7pyN952ebyyHhwS9xDi1jfGI";
 protected-headers="v1"
From: Stefan Esser <se@freebsd.org>
To: Karl Denninger <karl@denninger.net>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <225e4da5-79ec-a57a-90e5-35989e6484d5@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Reading a corrupted file on ZFS
References: <da892eeb-233f-551f-2faa-62f42c3c1d5b@artem.ru>
 <0ca45adf-8f60-a4c3-6264-6122444a3ffd@denninger.net>
 <899c6b4f-2368-7ec2-4dfe-fa09fab35447@artem.ru>
 <20210212165216.2f613482@fabiankeil.de>
 <10977ffc-f806-69dd-0cef-d4fd4fc5f649@artem.ru>
 <2f82f113-9ca1-99a9-a433-89e3ae5edcbe@denninger.net>
 <2bf4f69c-9d5d-5ff9-0daa-c87515437ca3@artem.ru>
 <5aa03138-1dc8-5a9c-1be6-d47ed22fc0cf@denninger.net>
In-Reply-To: <5aa03138-1dc8-5a9c-1be6-d47ed22fc0cf@denninger.net>

--UPHcda4tR7pyN952ebyyHhwS9xDi1jfGI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Am 12.02.21 um 20:49 schrieb Karl Denninger:
> On 2/12/2021 13:26, Artem Kuchin wrote:
>> 12.02.2021 19:37, Karl Denninger =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82:
>>> On 2/12/2021 11:22, Artem Kuchin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is frustrating. why..why..
>>>
>>> You created a synthetic situation that in the real world almost-never=
=20
>>> exists (ONE byte modified in all copies in the same allocation block =

>>> but all other data in that block is intact and recoverable.)
>>>
>> I could be 1 GB file with ZFS wisth block size of 1MB and with rotten =

>> bits within the same 1MB of block on different disks. How i did it is =

>> not important, life is unpredictable, i'm not trying to avoid=20
>> everything. The question is what to do when it happens. And currently =

>> the answer is - nothing.
>>
> The answer to a problem that does not present itself statistically=20
> speaking in the real world is the last one you worry about.=C2=A0 Worry=
 about=20
> all the other ones and cover them first.

True for some kinds of real world, false for others.

I have a number of older 2 TB drives and use 2 of them to store
DVB transport stream data, for later processing. They are not
mirrored and the data format assumes that the transmission is not
perfect. I have noticed that some of these files have been lost
due to bad sectors, and while this would not be a problem on UFS,
ZFS thinks I should not trust the file at all, despite 99,9999%
of it being perfectly usable. (A fraction of the TS data is
extracted from these files and stored as PS data on a ZFS RAID,
where it will be safe and I never lost a file.)

There are other applications that do not care for all data to be
perfectly conserved (I know of some) and where using a mirrored
setup configuration would just be a waste of money.

Not everybody operates a data center with a large drive farm that
holds data worth magnitudes more than the hardware cost (in which
case the cost of redundancy is well justified).


A solution could be to use UFS for files that should be readable
(or recoverable with a tool) after single sector failures.

But why should I have to mix UFS for such data with ZFS for the
rest of the system (and I know you very well that these two do
not mix too well if both are put under simultaneous high load).


Therefore: There are valid reasons to not have redundancy and
still not loose a large file of data for single bad block of a
non-redundant (e.g striped for performance) ZPOOL/ZFS.

Regards, STefan


--UPHcda4tR7pyN952ebyyHhwS9xDi1jfGI--

--uHKKMmNIODgVzi0bd1D7Ukk51iUrmlja9
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="OpenPGP_signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="OpenPGP_signature"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

wsB5BAABCAAjFiEEo3HqZZwL7MgrcVMTR+u171r99UQFAmAoA4IFAwAAAAAACgkQR+u171r99USa
mgf/Yp8uDF4C8g33eRB0HuRjkOiY4rkgjPgY9xPdBi9WwnIfxfeJd9s4xTrmKlSdtEXaDukC0BZ/
K8oRZmtcAOo1XidluL5dP8BIJQzhewwxIv5JcFjQlcbNBEqxy7D4YYnzIEs1tebM60BajWkY1Y8M
cS3GCvxVRAgmCLMWtUG+WIV0bsrv3TosJTRWMfugaEjUzn5lbvtKDWk6YEAMj2NMtqaF6zWT+KsX
PClwuyiX9waAzR2YAQMMywJnQWrzZt0Ape5gW0ZdyUno1Y6asCe8ApsHSxNED2z3O2lGh/6h5Iml
Ipp9BehNJ9LLPNqlhRPGOrMlJ15E4/UThJyfTVKm0g==
=SjJL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--uHKKMmNIODgVzi0bd1D7Ukk51iUrmlja9--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?225e4da5-79ec-a57a-90e5-35989e6484d5>