On Sun, 8 Jul 2012, Brett Pemberton wrote:
Which brings up something that has made me curious. Why does everyone name their zfs pool (and sometimes filesystem too) 'tank'?
Is it just because that's what all the examples do, and people cut and paste, or don't want to deviate? Or superstition? Or tradition?
Why not? It's not a bad name. Maybe my choice of tank2 and tank3 leave something to be desired though. If only zfs could deal with different sized devices like btrfs, I wouldn't need all those extra tanks.
Because when I gave ZFS a test, I refused, and named them something else, and not long after I had a hardware failure. Could this have been caused by an angry ZFS ghost who wasn't happy with my tankless system?
Yes. I would have thought the battle tank ammunition used against it would have been a dead giveaway that the tanks were offended. -- Tim Connors