4 ms·
I used ZFS in two production instances a few years ago on Solaris, and had two instances of a bug that totally corrupted the superblock on each drive, meaning t
by NeutronBoy 10y ago
I used ZFS in two production instances a few years ago on Solaris, and had two instances of a bug that totally corrupted the superblock on each drive, meaning that all data was gone with no way to recover.
Now I'm back to HW RAID, LVM, and ext4, which works a treat, and I'll be using that until I have more faith in ZFS.
- feld 10y agoYou had incredibly bad luck then unless you weren't running Solaris on Sun hardware, in which case you may have shot yourself in the foot with a poor disk controller and/or no ECC.
- feld 10y agois it not obvious that you can't pull any hardware out of the bin and expect ZFS to be OK with it? it has requirements just like many modern OS features. Run virtualization without any CPU extensions to accelerate it and then tell me you're upset when your VMs kill your host with excessive resource consumption.
- BrainInAJar 10y agoSun hardware is expensive junk, but a bad disk controller that lies to ZFS about sync status is definitely in the risk model.
- pixl97 10y agoWait till you have a HW raid silently write bad data. Nothing is safe.
- NeutronBoy 10y agoAt least I know what my options are to recover from that. When I tried to resolve my ZFS issues, no tools existed to try help recover because it wasn't a failure mode that had been considered as an option apparently.