Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 12:10:37 -0400 From: Michael Richards <hackish@gmail.com> To: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> Cc: "freebsd-fs@freebsd.org" <freebsd-fs@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ZFS Kernel Panics with 32 and 64 bit versions of 8.3 and 9.0 Message-ID: <CAPUouH2Ftt4ZDtanPmfTXa9%2BHRCkLCL=HcGqT9VgV%2BBrQcYE3A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1205060955450.1678@freddy.simplesystems.org> References: <20120506123826.412881065672@hub.freebsd.org> <alpine.GSO.2.01.1205060955450.1678@freddy.simplesystems.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 10:59 AM, Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote: > On Sun, 6 May 2012, Simon wrote: > >> >> Are you suggesting that if a disk sector goes bad or memory corrupts few >> blocks >> of data, the entire zpool is gonna go bust? can the same occur with a >> ZRAID? >> I thought the ZFS was designed to overcome all these issues to begin with. >> Is >> this not the case? > > > ZFS is designed to work with failing disks, but not failing memory. It is > recommended to use only systems with ECC memory. > > The OS itself (any OS!) is succeptible to crash/corruption due to failing > memory but without zfs's checksums, you might not be aware of such > corruptions or the crash might be more delayed. I can accept the fact that some filesystem corruption may have happened from the bad RAM. The issue now is recovering it. All the hardware has been replaced but I cannot import the ZFS pool without causing a kernel panic and that is the the problem here. To me it matters not if the corruption occurred from RAM or the hard disk - I don't think it's a good idea to blindly trust any filesystem data. At minimum fail to import the pool but don't bring the entire system to a halt. This isn't even a system drive - it's purely data.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPUouH2Ftt4ZDtanPmfTXa9%2BHRCkLCL=HcGqT9VgV%2BBrQcYE3A>