[gpfsug-discuss] gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 62, Issue 33

[Steve Duersch]

>>For me it's the protection against bitrot and added protection against
silent data corruption
GNR has this functionality.  Right now that is available through ESS
though.  Not yet as software only.

Steve Duersch
Spectrum Scale
845-433-7902
IBM Poughkeepsie, New York




gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org wrote on 03/15/2017 10:25:59 AM:


>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:25:41 +0000
> From: "Buterbaugh, Kevin L" <Kevin.Buterbaugh at Vanderbilt.Edu>
> To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
> Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] mmcrfs issue
> Message-ID: <F5D928E7-5ADF-4491-A8FB-AF3885E9A8A3 at vanderbilt.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi All,
>
> Since I started this thread I guess I should chime in, too ? for us
> it was simply that we were testing a device that did not have
> hardware RAID controllers and we were wanting to implement something
> roughly equivalent to RAID 6 LUNs.
>
> Kevin
>
> > On Mar 14, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Aaron Knister <aaron.s.knister at nasa.gov>
wrote:
> >
> > For me it's the protection against bitrot and added protection
> against silent data corruption and in theory the write caching
> offered by adding log devices that could help with small random
> writes (although there are other problems with ZFS + synchronous
> workloads that stop this from actually materializing).
> >
> > -Aaron
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20170315/3d5fc230/attachment.htm>