On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Frank Cusack <fcus...@fcusack.com> wrote:
> > if you have 100TB of data, wouldn't you have a completely redundant > storage network -- dual FC switches on different electrical supplies, > etc. i've never designed or implemented a storage network before but > such designs seem common in the literature and well supported by > Solaris. i have done such designs with data networks and such > redundancy is quite common. > > i mean, that's a lot of data to go missing due to a single device > failing -- which it will. > > not to say it's not a problem with zfs, just that in the real world, > it should be mitigated since your storage network design would overcome > a single failure *anyway* -- regardless of zfs. > It's hardly uncommon for an entire datacenter to go down, redundant power or not. When it does, if it means I have to restore hundreds of terabytes if not petabytes from tape instead of just restoring the files that were corrupted or running an fsck, we've got issues. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
