> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss- > boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of devsk > > What do you mean original? dedup creates only one copy of the file > blocks. The file was not corrupt when it was copied 3 months ago.
Please describe the problem. If you copied the file 3 months ago, and the new & old copies are both referencing the same blocks on disk thanks to dedup, and the new copy has become corrupt, then the original has also become corrupt. In the OP, you seem to imply that the original is not corrupt, but the new copy is corrupt, and you can't fix the new copy by overwriting it with a fresh copy of the original. This makes no sense. > > If you have ZFS, and redundancy, this won't happen. > > (Unless you have > > ailing ram/cpu/etc) > > > > You are saying ZFS will detect and rectify this kind of corruption in a > deduped pool automatically if enough redundancy is present? Can that > fail sometimes? Under what conditions? I'm saying ZFS checksums every block on disk, read or written, and if any checksum mismatches, then ZFS automatically checks the "other" copy ... from the other disk in the mirror, or reconstructed from the redundancy in raid, or whatever. By having redundancy, ZFS will automatically correct any checksum mismatches it encounters. If a checksum is mismatched on *both* sides of the mirror, it means either (a) both disks went bad at the same time, which is unlikely, but nonzero probability, or (b) there's faulty ram or cpu or some other single-point of failure in the system. > I raised a technical question and you are going all personal on me. Woah. Where did that come from??? _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
