Linked by Pobrecito Hablador on Mon 2nd Nov 2009 21:19 UTC
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris One of the advantages of ZFS is that it doesn't need a fsck. Replication, self-healing and scrubbing are a much better alternative. After a few years of ZFS life, can we say it was the correct decision? The reports in the mailing list are a good indicator of what happens in the real world, and it appears that once again, reality beats theory. The author of the article analyzes the implications of not having a fsck tool and tries to explain why he thinks Sun will add one at some point.
Thread beginning with comment 392597
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

>I can't recall hearing NTFS devs or Ext3 devs complaining about it."

Usually ext3/4 devs are complaining about different applications (like KDE) that should do their very own homework. So to speak, they don't have any clue what they're actually doing. If it comes to reliable filesystems Linux is a huge disappointment. Apart from XFS, but that's another story.

Reply Parent Score: 1