HAMMER History

[PeerCorps Trust Fund]

Exactly, which is kind of why I raised the question. 

If HAMMER undo is able to restore a previously corrupted file from history, why then isn't this also comparable to a type of "healing" feature? 

ZFS's scrub is automagic once set up via cron, but I can't really understand what makes it all that different from what HAMMER can do when corrupted files are found (assuming history is intact).

The second reason why I raised the question is because each time I read about the attributes of ZFS, the self-healing argument is often raised as being one of the so called ground-breaking features. But, HAMMER has similar capability in this regard it seems. It just doesn't appear that clearly in the list of bullet points in HAMMER's favor.




On 05/16/2015 04:55 PM, Justin Sherrill wrote:
> On May 16, 2015 2:54 AM, "PeerCorps Trust Fund" <ipc at peercorpstrust.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> What is often mentioned in texts about HAMMER undo however, seems to
> revolve around user error and file loss, such as accidental deletions or a
> broken config file. But if the above example is also a scenario, can it be
> also said that HAMMER has "data-healing" capabilities similar to ZFS's
> "self-healing"?
> 
> I always thought self-healing implies an automatic action, and Hammer's
> undo is not.  This may be a question of semantics.
> 

-- 
Mike