On May 5, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Mon, 5 May 2008, eric kustarz wrote: >> >> That's not true: >> http://blogs.sun.com/erickustarz/entry/zil_disable >> >> Perhaps people are using "consistency" to mean different things >> here... > > Consistency means that fsync() assures that the data will be written > to disk so no data is lost. It is not the same thing as "no > corruption". ZFS will happily lose some data in order to avoid some > corruption if the system loses power.
Ok, that makes more sense. You're talking from the application perspective, whereas my blog entry is from the file system's perspective (disabling the ZIL does not compromise on-disk consistency). eric _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
