101–110 of 168 posts
So this is not a "ZFS bug", but a "ZFS on Linux" bug. The actual ZFS on systems which have had ZFS for decades is not affected at all.
ZFS hasn't existed "for decades".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The OP appears to speak German natively. In German they are much more hyphen happy than English. It's probably the most common error I see among German speakers typing English.
Exactly this. In German the headline would just have been: "Linuxzfsdatenverlustfehler gedfunden!" Getting this stuff right in English is hard. (Pun intended) Sry!
One of those days, eh?
(You spent all the attention on that first word ;-)
We are working on it. We know what patch introduced the regression and 0.7.8 is going out soon to revert it. Until then, users should downgrade to 0.7.6 if they have not already. The Gentoo and EPEL maintainers have pulled the affected releases from the repositories (technically masked on Gentoo). Ubuntu was never affected. The regression makes it so that creating a new file could fail with ENOSPC after which files c…
This is a good reminder for everyone that snapshots are not backups. Also, thank you for all of the hard work on ZoL!
Were this not ZFS, I would agree with you, however, since zfs rollback will revert to previous state and if the snapshot is on a redundant vdev, there is no difference between that and losing your backup due to a damaged tape.
In fact, zfs snapshots are exactly how time machine on illumos based operating systems is implemented.
Probably obvious, but hooray for open source software! What a fantastic response to the bug.
Imagine if this had happened to Apple, everyone and his dog would be rolling over each other villifying them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a good reminder for everyone that snapshots are not backups. Also, thank you for all of the hard work on ZoL!
You are welcome. I should clarify the snapshots remark. The problem with how this interacts with snapshots is that the snapshots containing orphaned files cannot be repaired by software without BPR. They can only be listed by software for deletion by the administrator. Also, for the dataset’s tip, the future tool to repair it can only put the orphaned files into a lost+found directory without the original file names.
So this is not a "ZFS bug", but a "ZFS on Linux" bug. The actual ZFS on systems which have had ZFS for decades is not affected at all.
> The actual ZFS on systems which have had ZFS for decades is not affected at all. ZFS hasn't existed "for decades".
So this is not a "ZFS bug", but a "ZFS on Linux" bug. The actual ZFS on systems which have had ZFS for decades is not affected at all.
> The actual ZFS on systems which have had ZFS for decades is not affected at all. ZFS hasn't existed "for decades".
Probably obvious, but hooray for open source software! What a fantastic response to the bug.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been running ZFS on macOS (OS X), illumos and Solaris for a good 7 years or so now. A major part of the reason I switched over fully, despite some warts, was that I experienced actual and significant data rot from stuff I was carrying forward under XFS (IRIX), HFS, etc. I don't consider my personal stuff to go back that long, but I still have things from 1993 or so that matter to me. I did a review around 2009…
It sounds like you are suggesting that checksums and other integrity features obviate the need to back up your important files.
Now of course it is possible to build levels of verification higher up the stack, but the problem with a lot of the ones available to general user is that they either leave holes in various places or they're just plain too much of a PITA (and "PITA" here includes a significant enough level of slow down) or both. It's much easier to do a good job if the FS itself is reasonably trustable and has verification and basic repair built in. FWIW I do use tools like par2 for cold or cool backups of ZFS dumps to targets like tape or Glacier now, but it's still a big help to my sanity to have as much of that dealt with at a low, automated level for hot/warm systems where convenience is critical.
Probably obvious, but hooray for open source software! What a fantastic response to the bug.
Imagine if this had happened to Apple, everyone and his dog would be rolling over each other villifying them.