> On 08/30/12 11:07, 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.
> If you are using Solaris 11 or any of the Illumos based distributions
> you have not choice you must use ZFS as your root/boot filesystem.
I did not realize that. I was trying to decide between S10 I use at work
although on Sun hardware and S11 since I have no experience with it.
> I would recommend that if physically possible attach a second drive to
> make it a mirror.
I understand that is the best way to go.
> Personally I've run many many builds of Solaris on single disk laptop
> systems and never has it lost me access to my data. The only time I
> lost access to data on a single disk system was because of total hard
> drive failure. I run with copies=2 set on my home directory and any
> datasets I store data in when on a single disk system.
> However much much more importantly ZFS does not preclude the need for
> off system backups. Even with mirroring, and snaphots you still have to
> have a backup of important data elsewhere. No file system and more
> importantly no hardware is that good.
Words to live by!
zfs-discuss mailing list