On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 10:41:26PM -0600, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008, Gary Mills wrote: > >The split responsibility model is quite appealing. I'd like to see > >ZFS address this model. Is there not a way that ZFS could delegate > >responsibility for both error detection and correction to the storage > >device, at least one more sophisticated than a physical disk? > > Why is split responsibility appealing? In almost any complex system > whether it be government or computing, split responsibility results in > indecision and confusion. Heirarchical decision making based on > common rules is another matter entirely.
Now this becomes semantics. There still has to be a hierarchy, but it's split into areas of responsibility. In the case of ZFS over SAN storage, the area boundary now is the SAN cable. > Unfortunately SAN equipment > is still based on technology developed in the early '80s and simply > tries to behave like a more reliable disk drive rather than a > participating intelligent component in a system which may detect, > tolerate, and spontaneously correct any faults. That's exactly what I'm asking. How can ZFS and SAN equipment be improved so that they cooperate to make the whole system more reliable? Converting the SAN storage into a JBOD is not a valid solution. -- -Gary Mills- -Unix Support- -U of M Academic Computing and Networking- _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
