4 ms·
this is cool, but I have to wonder how much of this is ZFS and how much is the hardware. don’t get me wrong: it’s impressive, but to make the claims about ZFS y
by mirceal 7y ago
this is cool, but I have to wonder how much of this is ZFS and how much is the hardware. don’t get me wrong: it’s impressive, but to make the claims about ZFS you need to have a scientific approach that would involve a control group, various types of motherboards, memories, power supplies, etc + thorough reproducibility of the conditions.
- mrighele 7y agoAnecdote, but I had once a broken SATA controller that would send borked data to the disks. That was tricky because the disks were correctly writing the data sent to them and from the OS side all the operations were completed successfully. I realized that only because there was a continuous stream of checksum errors on all the disks of the pool.
- blackflame7000 7y agoHad this same problem too. Compared two sata controllers and noticed one was missing an inductor from the board. Amazing it worked at all
- viraptor 7y agoSame. Specifically, I the fault is inserted in a way which may never even manifest at zfs level. Any relevant failures could be more reliably replicated by injecting read/write failures and by writing random bytes to the disk. What else would you expect zfs to correct? Whether it worked out not can be read back from the error counters.