Tuesday, September 5, 2006, 10:58:32 AM, you wrote:
WYT> On 9/5/06, Torrey McMahon <Torrey.McMahon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This is simply not true. ZFS would protect against the same type of
>> errors seen on an individual drive as it would on a pool made of HW raid
>> LUN(s). It might be overkill to layer ZFS on top of a LUN that is
>> already protected in some way by the devices internal RAID code but it
>> does not "make your data susceptible to HW errors caused by the storage
>> subsystem's RAID algorithm, and slow down the I/O".
WYT> & Roch's recommendation to leave at least 1 layer of redundancy to ZFS
WYT> allows the extension of ZFS's own redundancy features for some truely
WYT> remarkable data reliability.
WYT> Perhaps, the question should be how one could mix them to get the best
WYT> of both worlds instead of going to either extreme.
Depends on your data but sometime it could be useful to create HW RAID
and then do just striping on ZFS side between at least two LUNs. That
way you do not get data protection but fs/pool protection with ditto
block. Of course each LUN is HW RAID made of different physical disks.
zfs-discuss mailing list