atom feed19 messages in org.opensolaris.zfs-discussRe: [zfs-discuss] Does your device ho...
FromSent OnAttachments
Bryant EadonFeb 10, 2009 10:35 am 
Peter SchullerFeb 10, 2009 10:52 am 
Miles NordinFeb 10, 2009 11:23 am 
Chris RiddFeb 10, 2009 11:27 am 
TimFeb 10, 2009 12:19 pm 
Peter SchullerFeb 10, 2009 1:36 pm 
David Collier-BrownFeb 10, 2009 1:55 pm 
Miles NordinFeb 10, 2009 2:56 pm 
Peter SchullerFeb 10, 2009 3:45 pm 
Bob FriesenhahnFeb 10, 2009 4:08 pm 
Jeff BonwickFeb 10, 2009 4:41 pm 
Toby ThainFeb 10, 2009 5:23 pm 
Miles NordinFeb 10, 2009 6:10 pm 
Frank CusackFeb 10, 2009 7:36 pm 
Toby ThainFeb 10, 2009 8:53 pm 
Bryant EadonFeb 10, 2009 10:28 pm 
Eric D. MudamaFeb 11, 2009 12:25 am 
David Dyer-BennetFeb 11, 2009 7:27 am 
Frank CusackFeb 11, 2009 8:24 am 
Subject:Re: [zfs-discuss] Does your device honor write barriers?
From:David Dyer-Bennet (
Date:Feb 11, 2009 7:27:07 am

On Wed, February 11, 2009 02:33, Eric D. Mudama wrote:

BTW, funky/busted bridge hardware in external USB devices don't count.

They do for me; I'm currently using external USB drives for my backup datasets (in the process of converting to use zfs send/recv to get the data there). My normal procedure even involves yanking the USB cables (in theory long after the backup is completed and the pool is exported, but if the script fails/hangs I might well yank the cable in the morning without verifying the results of the script overnight first).

I'm more interested in major rotating drive vendors... Seagate/Maxtor, WD, Hitachi/IBM, Fujitsu, Toshiba, etc.

There are a larger set of disaster modes if the problem is at that level, of course. I'd really like to see a reasonably cook-book disk qualification procedure that could detect these problems. Might have to involve a timed disconnect of some sort, which might require hot-swap hardware, but that's something one could live with. And if the qualification procedure were widely believed to be good, aggregating results would be useful.