[andrewcooke]

so how is that better than raid? it sounds identical to what is described in the article - the problem was not scrubbing (afaict).

[ars]

ZFS is at the file level, not the disk level. So recovering from errors (i.e. rebuilds) is MUCH faster.

[wazoox]

Only when the array is mostly empty. For several years hardware RAID controllers have been rebuilding only used space, too. Really, ZFS isn't that much of the miracle some want it to be.

[olgeni]

How do they know what space is used or unused?

[wazoox]

Apparently they keep a block list somewhere.

[andrewcooke]

but that's not what we were talking about! no-one was saying "zfs sucks as much as raid but at least it rebuilds faster afterwards". the implication was that zfs avoided the problem in the article (when, it seems, both zfs and raid need to be scrubbed, and both avoid the problem when that is done).