On February 11, 2009 12:21:03 PM -0600 David Dyer-Bennet <d...@dd-b.net>
wrote:
I've spent $2000 on hardware and, by now, hundreds of hours of my time
trying to get and keep a ZFS-based home NAS working. Because it's the
only affordable modern practice, my backups are on external drives (USB
drives because that's "the" standard for consumer external drives, they
were much cheaper when I bought them than any that supported Firewire at
the 1TB size). So hearing how easy it is to muck up a ZFS pool on USB is
leading me, again, to doubt this entire enterprise.
Same here, except I have no doubts. As I only use the USB for backup,
I'm quite happy with it. I have a 4-disk enclosure that accepts SATA
drives.
My main storage is a 12-bay SAS/SATA enclosure.
After my own experience with USB (I still have the problem that I cannot
create new pools while another USB drive is present with a zpool on it,
whether or not that zpool is active ... no response on that thread yet
and I expect never), I'm not thrilled with it and suspect some of the
problem lies in the way that USB is handled differently than other
physical connections (can't use 'format', e.g.). Anyway to get back to
the point I wouldn't want to use it for primary storage, even if it
were only 2 drives. That's unfortunate, but in line with Solaris'
hardware support, historically.
-frank
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
