On Dec 16, 2007 10:10 AM, David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 16, 2007 at 02:12:01AM -0800, Tracy R Reed wrote: > > Bob La Quey wrote: > >> The cost of ZFS + JBOD should be lower than anything > >> built on RAID. No hardware RAID controller to buy or > >> break. > > > > I'm still reading about ZFS but doesn't it involve a form of software RAID > > integrated with the rest of the storage system? > > As I understand it, it allows a given filesystem to exist across multiple > devices, and for the filesystems you have to more freely use the available > space. > > I don't think it provides redundancy, at least not on a full-system level > like RAID does. Simple google searches find plenty of people putting ZFS > on top of a RAID.
That is because they are _used_ to using hardware RAID. It is _not_ an argument for why using hardware RAID is a good thing. > I think it does help in a lot of the same scenarios where LVM helps: freely > using JBOD. That is true. But in addition ZFS provides end to end data integrity checks and software RAID. See (the comments are good too) <quote> As always, note that ZFS end-to-end data integrity doesn't require any special hardware. You don't need pricey disks or arrays, you don't need to reformat drives with 520-byte sectors, and you don't have to modify applications to benefit from it. It's entirely automatic, and it works with cheap disks. </quote> http://blogs.sun.com/bonwick/entry/zfs_end_to_end_data BobLQ -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
