On Dec 19, 2006, at 10:15, Torrey McMahon wrote:
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Jonathan Edwards wrote:
On Dec 19, 2006, at 07:17, Roch - PAE wrote:
Shouldn't there be a big warning when configuring a pool
with no redundancy and/or should that not require a -f flag ?
why? what if the redundancy is below the pool .. should we
warn that ZFS isn't directly involved in redundancy decisions?
Yes because if ZFS doesn't know about it then ZFS can't use it to
do corrections when the checksums (which always work) detect
problems.
We do not have the intelligent end-to-end management to make these
judgments. Trying to make one layer of the stack {stronger,
smarter, faster, bigger,} while ignoring the others doesn't help.
Trying to make educated guesses as to what the user intends doesn't
help either.
"Hi! It looks like you're writing a block"
Would you like help?
- Get help writing the block
- Just write the block without help
- (Don't show me this tip again)
somehow I think we all know on some level that letting a system
attempt to guess your intent will get pretty annoying after a while ..
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
