<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ZFS</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lewiz.org/archive/2006/08/25/zfs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lewiz.org/archive/2006/08/25/zfs/</link>
	<description>everyone has a shangri-la to find</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Chris Gerhard</title>
		<link>http://www.lewiz.org/archive/2006/08/25/zfs/#comment-371</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Gerhard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-371</guid>
		<description>It is not actually that the hardware raid device hides an error but that if you are unlucky enough to suffer a data corruption and you are relying on the hardware raid to give you redundancy then there is nothing ZFS can do to recover.

If on the other hand ZFS has control of the redundancy, be that via mirroring or RAIDZ when it detects an error it can not only report it but also recover and repair. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is not actually that the hardware raid device hides an error but that if you are unlucky enough to suffer a data corruption and you are relying on the hardware raid to give you redundancy then there is nothing ZFS can do to recover.</p>
<p>If on the other hand ZFS has control of the redundancy, be that via mirroring or RAIDZ when it detects an error it can not only report it but also recover and repair. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
