>>>>> "gm" == Gary Mills <mi...@cc.umanitoba.ca> writes:
gm> I suppose my RFE for two-level ZFS should be included,
Not that my opinion counts for much, but I wasn't deaf to it---I did
respond.
I thought it was kind of based on mistaken understanding. It included
this strangeness of the upper ZFS ``informing'' the lower one when
corruption had occured on the network, and the lower ZFS was supposed
to do something with the physical disks...to resolve corruption on the
network? why? IIRC several others pointed out the same bogosity.
It makes slightly more sense in the write direction than the read
direction maybe, but I still don't fully get the plan. It is a new
protocol to replace iSCSI? or NFS? or, what? Is it a re-invention
of pNFS or Lustre, but with more work since you're starting from zero,
and less architectural foresight?
pgpYG81ClxWHA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
