> On 08/30/2012 12:07 PM, Anonymous wrote:
> > Hi. I have a spare off the shelf consumer PC and was thinking about loading
> > Solaris on it for a development box since I use Studio @work and like it
> > better than gcc. I was thinking maybe it isn't so smart to use ZFS since it
> > has only one drive. If ZFS detects something bad it might kernel panic and
> > lose the whole system right? I realize UFS /might/ be ignorant of any
> > corruption but it might be more usable and go happily on it's way without
> > noticing? Except then I have to size all the partitions and lose out on
> > compression etc. Any suggestions thankfully received.
> Simply set copies=2 and go on your merry way. Works for me and protects
> you from bit rot. 

That sounds interesting. How does ZFS implement that? Does it make sure to
keep the pieces of the duplicate on different parts of the drive?

> Even if you do decide to put a second drive in at a later time, just
> remember, RAID is not a backup solution. I use deja-dup to backup my
> important files daily to an off-site machine for that. 

Oh I realize that but this isn't a production machine just an unused lonely
PC that could be running Solaris instead.
zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to