Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 15th Apr 2008 20:07 UTC, submitted by Moochman
Thread beginning with comment 309845
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: RAID SATA support still not there
by Weeman on Wed 16th Apr 2008 10:32
in reply to "RE[2]: RAID SATA support still not there"
but zfs cant keep data with powerloss like a real hw raid. if my fileserver loses power all data in the raidcontroller will containpower and unwritten data can be written during next boot.
Doesn't guarantee all data makes it properly to the disks, though. Otherwise, people wouldn't talk about the RAID5 write hole (ZFS RAID doesn't have that, since we're at it).
For that matter:
1) Systems where it matters are using UPS backup.
2) Nothing stops you from not using the RAID functionality on a battery caching RAID controller.
RE[3]: RAID SATA support still not there
by zemplar on Wed 16th Apr 2008 11:10
in reply to "RE[2]: RAID SATA support still not there"
but zfs cant keep data with powerloss like a real hw raid. if my fileserver loses power all data in the raidcontroller will containpower and unwritten data can be written during next boot.
ONLY if you hardware raid has a battery-backed cache...not likely any cheap VIA-based RAID solution is using a battery-backed cache.
I'll take ZFS any day over most RAID controllers...at least until you get into the high-end hardware RAID cards seemingly only affordable by businesses.
RE[4]: RAID SATA support still not there
by dizzey on Wed 16th Apr 2008 12:31
in reply to "RE[3]: RAID SATA support still not there"






Member since:
2005-10-15
but zfs cant keep data with powerloss like a real hw raid. if my fileserver loses power all data in the raidcontroller will containpower and unwritten data can be written during next boot.