Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Where ZFS falls down

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default Where ZFS falls down


  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Yeah - that's not exactly news.

    On the other hand, other file systems 'get around' this problem by not even having vdevs and pools in the first place, so not sure what your point is.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by joffe View Post
    Yeah - that's not exactly news.
    It would be better if it was news because it would mean that it's not a very old bug with still no fix.

    Quote Originally Posted by joffe View Post
    what your point is.
    If you want a way to put disks into a storage array and never remove them ZFS FTW!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    55

    Default And Folks Wonder Why ZFS Is Important

    Quote Originally Posted by nutznboltz View Post
    It would be better if it was news because it would mean that it's not a very old bug with still no fix.


    If you want a way to put disks into a storage array and never remove them ZFS FTW!
    Look at the growing number of regulatory schema that require extremely-long-term (if not permanent) record retention (HIPAA, Sarbanes-Oxley, aspects of the US health-care reform regulations, etc.). This is something that banks, brokerages, credit unions, insurance companies, etc., have dealt with by having one or more machines running Solaris to house those records that require long-term or permanent retention. That is, indeed, the reason for the creation of ZFS (and why it has its nomenclature) - ZFS was designed to be the end-all of filesystems; once something went in, it wasn't supposed to leave. Not a bug in ZFS, but a critical feature.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •