Migration from the KQ Implementation

Uncle Stoatwarbler stoatwblr at gmail.com
Thu May 5 22:12:20 EDT 2011


On 05/05/11 15:43, devsk wrote:
> On May 5, 4:53 am, Uncle Stoatwarbler<stoatw... at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> This is as much about perception as reality. A fs without some form of
>> single-user/offline recovery mode is regarded with extreme suspcion by
>> greybeards, with lots of past experience as the reason why.
>
> An FS without a single-user/offline recovery is exactly what we need.

You mean "A FS where single-user/offline recovery is seldom if ever 
required."

I din't care if it's never used, what I DO care about is that it's there 
if something goes wrong. DO you have any idea how long it takes to 
restore 350Tb of data off LTO5 tapes?

> Who wants to fsck the FS at boot? This is so 90's mentality. ZFS is
> the only FS that fills that need for me.

I don't, I have several hundred Tb of data and I KNOW how long it takes 
to fsck it. However I want the ability to do it if needed.

"It works for me" is not something I can push to a bunch of fairly 
conservative scientists and admins, for a repository used by most of the 
researchers on the planet who are investigating earth and mars satellite 
maps in high detail to try and verify global warming calculations.



More information about the zfs-discuss mailing list