On 06/23/2012 10:38 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>> last binary production ready, used version 14; i also found it
>> to be stable
>> Any opensource zfs pool verisons beyound that, i am not really sure
>> about their stablity compared
>> to UFS rock solid filesystem.
> No ZFS pool version can be as trusty as UFS because of ZFS on disk
> structure that is plain dangerous.
> ZFS use tree-like structure for everything. If upper part of tree is
> corrupted, everything below "disappears" and cannot be found.
> Having 2,3 or even 100 copies of metadata doesn't help if you would
> have (maybe transient) hardware problem and bad metadata would be
> writen 2,3 or even 100 times. with proper checksum of course.
> UFS uses flat structure - inodes in known places. superblocks are used
> to find info about placement, and there are many copies of which only
> first is updated under normal operation.
> In really unlikely case of all superblocks corrupted just use newfs on
> virtual device (may be md) of same size, with same block and fragment
> size, and byte per inode, and copy superblock from here.
Dont email me privately. I like ZFS design however i was only
questioning v28 stability for production
compared to a mature production tested UFS.