I think I see it now. I said I prefer software raid over hardware raid, and your response is that zfs software raid is preferable to hardware raid.
So basically, you're disagreeing with the same arguments that I was disagreeing with, and I misread it as you disagreeing with my argument. On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) <[email protected] > wrote: > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of John > > Abreau > > > > I don't see how ZFS is a counterexample. I'm aware of ZFS as a software > > component of the OS, but I've never even heard of ZFS being baked into > the > > disk controller below the level of the OS. > > > > An argument about ZFS as an alternative to both hardware and software > > RAID would be completely orthogonal to an argument about the relative > > merits of hardware vs software RAID. It wouldn't be a counterexample; > > instead, it would be an entirely different discussion. > > ZFS does software raid, and because it has intimate knowledge of the > filesystem (not just doing raid at the block level) it is able to do > performance optimizations that cannot be done with hardware raid (having > only knowledge of the block level). So ZFS software raid outperforms > hardware raid. > > Did that make it clearer? > -- John Abreau / Executive Director, Boston Linux & Unix Email [email protected] / WWW http://www.abreau.net / PGP-Key-ID 0x920063C6 PGP-Key-Fingerprint A5AD 6BE1 FEFE 8E4F 5C23 C2D0 E885 E17C 9200 63C6 _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
