undefined | Better HN

0 pointswting5y ago0 comments

>ECC is recommended but many people, myself included, have run many stable years without ECC.

zfs requires ECC[0][1], do not skimp on this.

I ran many zfs pools for >8 years without issues until silent memory corruption happened to me, and now I can't access my data anymore (zfs won't let me mount a zpool that fails scrub checks).

0: Oracle (and previously Sun) documentation recommends ECC to prevent silent corruption:

>Consider using ECC memory to protect against memory corruption. Silent memory corruption can potentially damage your data.

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E23824_01/html/821-1448/zfspools-...

1: https://louwrentius.com/please-use-zfs-with-ecc-memory.html

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

vermaden5y ago· 1 in thread

Please stop repeating this lie that ZFS somehow needs ECC more then other filesystems.

All filesystems benefit from ECC memory but ZFS from all filesystems does its job best even without ECC.

Page 102 from https://is.gd/bsdstg here.

I'm getting bored repeating this over and over again.

GauntletWizard5y ago

The problem isn’t that ZFS needs ECC more. It’s that other filesystems will silently ignore the errors that ZFS points out. With other filesystems, you data just eats some corruption. With ZFS, you’re likely to encounter errors because you notice them - Because it’s extensive checksumming points out when a bit flips.

I’d much prefer to know, but if you’re used to not knowing, knowing is scary.

agapon5y ago

As the sibling comment says, ZFS does not _require_ ECC. It's your data that requires it. Whichever filesystem you use. If you care about the data, of course.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse