Re:Tell HN: ZFS silent data corruption bugfix – my research ...
by buildbot on Thursday December 07, 2023 @03:58AM
(#38554367)
Perfect for me is not perfect for others of course. I have not run into the issue you linked, that sounds frustrating to deal with.
Backups is the only (near) 100% way to insure you data I agree.
Re:Tell HN: ZFS silent data corruption bugfix – my research ...
by sgarland on Friday December 08, 2023 @08:19AM
(#38568646)
As someone currently rewriting Ansible plays to build Bookworm QEMU images with ZFS support, thank you for this incredibly niche and useful bit of information.
Re:Tell HN: ZFS silent data corruption bugfix – my research ...
by 3np on Friday December 08, 2023 @04:17PM
(#38574539)
Np! Actually, in case you're able to share some of those plays in any form, that could be very useful here, however niche :)
Re:Tell HN: ZFS silent data corruption bugfix – my research ...
by sgarland on Saturday December 09, 2023 @09:55AM
(#38582380)
I have an older version [0] for Bullseye that you're welcome to take a look at. It's actually combined Ansible + Packer, so if you point it at a Proxmox host, you get an image in ~10-15 minutes.
It's a fork of other work [1], modified and updated for Debian and Debian only. It also in absolutely no way has any best practices, which is why I'm doing a complete re-write with proper role dependencies, modularity, etc. When that's done, I'll be marking [0] as archived and linking to the new repo.
The new version also replaces the incredibly hacky shell script builder (hooray dialog) with Python, and updates Packer's JSON with HCL2.
[0]: https://github.com/stephanGarland/packer-proxmox-templates
Debian bookworm users: You need to enable backports for zfs. Both bugs are fixed in backports but still present in stable.
Let's do away with the tribalism in both ways? Calling it perfect is quite a stretch. I'm not saying "don't use zfs", just "you want to be prepared for the worst-case if your data matters". 3-2-1 and "validate your backups" still apply.