Anantha N. Srirama wrote:
I'm glad you asked this question. We are currently expecting 3511 storage sub-systems for our servers. We were wondering about their configuration as well. This ZFS thing throws a wrench in the old line think ;-) Seriously, we now have to put on a new hat to figure out the best way to leverage both the storage sub-system as well as ZFS.
[for the archives] There is *nothing wrong* with treating ZFS like UFS when configuring with LUNs hosted on RAID arrays. It is true that you will miss some of the self-healing features of ZFS, but at least you will know when the RAID array has munged your data -- a feature missing on UFS and most other file systems. -- richard _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
