[zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-02-26 Thread Philip Robar
Please note, I'm not trolling with this message. I worked in Sun's OS/Net group and am a huge fan of ZFS. The leading members of the FreeNAS community make it clear [1] (with a detailed explanation and links to reports

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-02-26 Thread Philip Robar
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:04 PM, Jason Belec wrote: > Well that's one point of view and choice. > > I'm sure those you refer to are far more knowledgeable than any other > individuals. > It's unclear to me how what I said (or possibly how I said it) caused you to reply in such a snarky way. I tho

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-02-26 Thread Philip Robar
Thank you for your reasoned and detailed response and subsequent followup. This was exactly what I was hoping for. I'm curious, have you read, *End-to-end Data Integrity for File Systems: A ZFS Case Study

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-02-28 Thread Philip Robar
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Bill Winnett wrote: > > Why is this a zfs issue. This is a ZFS issue because ZFS is advertised as being the most resilient file system currently available; however, a community leader in the FreeNAS forums (though, as pointed out by Daniel Becker, one without kn

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-03-01 Thread Philip Robar
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 2:36 PM, Richard Elling wrote: > > We might buy this argument if, in fact, no other program had the same > vulnerabilities. But *all* of them do -- including OSX. So it is > disingenuous > to claim this as a ZFS deficiency. > No it's disingenuous of you to ignore the fact

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-03-01 Thread Philip Robar
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: > > Back to the OP, I'm not sure why he felt he had to mentioned being > part of SunOS. ZFS was never part of sunos. > I didn't say I was part of SunOS (later renamed to Solaris 1). SunOS was dead and buried years before I joined the netwo

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-03-02 Thread Philip Robar
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Jean-Yves Avenard wrote: > On 28 February 2014 20:32, Philip Robar wrote: > > cyberjock is the biggest troll ever, not even the people actually > involved with FreeNAS (iX system) knows what to do with him. He does > spend an awful amount of time

Re: [zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-03-02 Thread Philip Robar
On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Jason Belec wrote: > Technically, what you qualify below is a truism under any hardware. ZFS is > neither more or less susceptible to RAM failure as it has nothing to do > with ZFS. Anything that gets written to the pool technically is sound. You > have chosen a sin

Re: [zfs-macos] pros/cons of multiple zfs filesystems

2014-03-17 Thread Philip Robar
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:35 AM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: > On 17. März 2014 at 05:00:25, roemer (uwe.ro...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > How does a 'copies=2' filesystem play together with a 'RAIDZ1' (or even > > > RAIDZ2) pool? RAIDZ would have all data stored redundantly already, so > > > would 'co

Re: [zfs-macos] Re: pros/cons of multiple zfs filesystems

2014-03-17 Thread Philip Robar
I admit to being one whose eyes glaze over when the discussion turns to i18n/l10n. So why should I use formD normalization? I've been using case sensitive filesystems on my Mac for as long as there was a choice (I grew up in UNIX land where this was made correctly from the start.) and I've never h

Re: [zfs-macos] Re: pros/cons of multiple zfs filesystems

2014-03-17 Thread Philip Robar
On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 3:40 PM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: > On 17. März 2014 at 19:17:23, Philip Robar (philip.ro...@gmail.com) wrote: > > I admit to being one whose eyes glaze over when the discussion turns to > > i18n/l10n. So why should I use formD normalization? > > Beca

[zfs-macos] ZFS w/o ECC RAM -> Total loss of data

2014-04-11 Thread Philip Robar
>From Andrew Galloway of Nexenta (Whom I'm pretty sure most would accept as the definition of a ZFS expert.*) ECC vs non-ECC RAM: The Great Debate: http://nex7.blogspot.com/2014/03/ecc-vs-non-ecc-ram-great-debate.html * "...I've been on literally 1000's of large ZFS deployments in the last 2+ y

Re: [zfs-macos] RAIDZ1 running slow =(

2014-05-20 Thread Philip Robar
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:28 PM, James Hoyt wrote: > > I tried searching if my drives are 4k with no luck. I saw an article > back from 2010 stating hard drives were planning to all be 4k in > 2011... this leads me to believe that they are 4k since I purchased > them new last year. Crap D: Is the