[Tfug] Should ZFS have an fsck tool? I thought this was interesting

[Eric Gearhart]

On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 7:09 AM, Zack Williams <zdwzdw at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:39 PM, Eric Gearhart <eric at nixwizard.net> wrote:
> > http://www.osnews.com/story/22423/Should_ZFS_Have_a_fsck_Tool_
> >
> > This thread was interesting, if only because of the insane amount of work
> > this guy did to recover his corrupt ZFS pool:
> >
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/zfs-discuss/2008-December/024403.html
>
> It's amazing what lengths people will go to in order to avoid making
> backups, and/or what new panacea of storage they'll hype up to do so.
>
> Seriously, if your data isn't in at least two different physical
> places at all times, it might as well not exist.
>
>
Well the other side of the argument with ZFS is that a corrupted pool
"shouldn't happen" according to Sun (er I mean Oracle)... all the steps this
guy did on that thread to delete the 'Uberblock" (I admit I don't know that
much about ZFS...) could have been done by a ZFS fsck

Just assuming that "We checksum everything and we're really smart and wrote
a really awesome filesystem with Zettabyte in the name" isn't good enough
IMO... you need an good filesystem checker

--
Eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tfug.org/pipermail/tfug_tfug.org/attachments/20091103/21850ccc/attachment-0002.html>