On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:03:14AM -0700, Chuck Swiger wrote: > On Oct 20, 2008, at 9:48 AM, Jeremy Chadwick wrote: >> Hm... I thought we determined earlier in this thread that the OP is >> not >> getting the benefits of ZFS checksums because he's not using raidz >> (only >> a single disk with a single pool)? > > He's not getting working filesystem redundancy with the existing config > and is vulnerable to losing data from a single drive failure, agreed. > But the ZFS checksum mechanism should still be working to detect data > corruption, even though ZFS cannot recover the corrupted data the way it > otherwise would if redundancy was available.
Ahh, I see. So to paraphrase, ZFS can detect checksum errors (data corruption) using any pool type (single disk, mirror, raidz, whatever), but can only *repair* the error when using a mirror or raidz. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"