From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe Subject: Re: suns raid-z / zfs Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:37:08 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20080217160403.GA15710@rap.rap.dk> <18361.1168.473685.214133@notabene.brown> <20080218053319.GA18863@rap.rap.dk> <18361.25379.998485.63488@notabene.brown> <20080218204529.GA17984@rap.rap.dk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Keld J=F8rn Simonsen wrote: > On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 09:51:15PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote: >> Recovery after a failed drive would not be an easy operation, and I >> cannot imagine it being even close to the raw speed of the device. > I thought this was a problem with most raid types, while > reconstructioning, performance is quite slow. And as there has been s= ome There is a difference between "recovery is quite slow" and "raid device access is quite slow" The former is an issue since it stretches the tim= e where you're in non-redundant danger while the latter is just inconvenient. regards Mario --=20 I heard, if you play a NT-CD backwards, you get satanic messages... That's nothing. If you play it forwards, it installs NT. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html