Dave Stubbs wrote:
I don't mean to be offensive Russel, but if you do
ever return to ZFS, please promise me that you will
never, ever, EVER run it virtualized on top of NTFS
(a.k.a. worst file system ever) in a production
environment. Microsoft Windows is a horribly
unreliable operating system in situations where
things like protecting against data corruption are
important. Microsoft knows this
Oh WOW! Whether or not our friend Russel virtualized on top of NTFS (he didn't - he used raw disk access) this point is amazing! System5 - based on this thread I'd say you can't really make this claim at all. Solaris suffered a crash and the ZFS filesystem lost EVERYTHING! And there aren't even any recovery tools?
HANG YOUR HEADS!!!
Recovery from the same situation is EASY on NTFS. There are piles of tools out
there that will recover the file system, and failing that, locate and extract
data. The key parts of the file system are stored in multiple locations on the
d
You mean the data that you don't know you have lost yet? ZFS allows you
to be very paranoid about data protection with things like copies=2,3,4
etc etc..
isk just in case. It's been this way for over 10 years. I'd say it seems from this thread that my data is a lot safer on NTFS than it is on ZFS!
I can't believe my eyes as I read all these responses blaming system engineering and hiding behind ECC memory excuses and "well, you know, ZFS is intended for more Professional systems and not consumer devices, etc etc." My goodness! You DO realize that Sun has this website called opensolaris.org which actually proposes to have people use ZFS on commodity hardware, don't you? I don't see a huge warning on that site saying "ATTENTION: YOU PROBABLY WILL LOSE ALL YOUR DATA".
I recently flirted with putting several large Unified Storage 7000 systems on
our corporate network. The hype about ZFS is quite compelling and I had
positive experience in my lab setting. But because of not having Solaris
capability on our staff we went in another direction instead.
You do realize that the 7000 series machines are appliances and have no
prerequisite for you to have any Solaris knowledge whatsoever? They are
a supported
device just like any other disk storage system that you can purchase
from any vendor and have it supported as such. To use it all you need is
a web browser. Thats it.
This is no different than your EMC array or HP Storageworks hardware,
except that the under pinnings of the storage system are there for all
to see in the form
of open source code contributed to the community by Sun.
Reading this thread, I'm SO glad we didn't put ZFS in production in ANY way. Guys, this is the real world. Stuff happens. It doesn't matter what the reason is - hardware lying about cache commits, out-of-order commits, failure to use ECC memory, whatever. It is ABSOLUTELY unacceptable for the filesystem to be entirely lost. No excuse or rationalization of any type can be justified. There MUST be at least the base suite of tools to deal with this stuff. without it, ZFS simply isn't ready yet.
Sounds like you have no real world experience of ZFS in production
environments and it's true reliability. As many people here report there
are thousands if not millions
of zpools out there containing business critical environments that are
happily fixing broken hardware on a daily basis. I have personally seen
all sorts of pieces of hardware
break and ZFS corrected and fixed things for me. I personally manage 50
plus ZFS zpools that are anywhere from 100GB to 30 TB. Works very, very,
very well for me.
I have never lost anything despite having had plenty of pieces of
hardware break in some form underneath ZFS.
I am saving a copy of this thread to show my colleagues and also those Sun
Microsystems sales people that keep calling.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
