I'll read that as "please don't integrate without mirror removal because it will entice people to run 'zpool detach' to reduce their redundancy". Let me know if I've misinterpreted your (Ray and ilovezfs) position.
I assume your concern about "total pool loss" is if the remaining plain device fails while doing the removal. It might be possible to allow the detached device to be substituted for the failed device in that case (we'd have to fix up the label). --matt On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Ray Pating <ray.pat...@gmail.com> wrote: > To be honest, this would result in people loss as well, since this may > well be a resume-generating event. > > There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who can read binary and > those who can't. > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:58 AM, ilove zfs <ilove...@icloud.com> wrote: > >> s/total people loss/total pool loss/ lol >> >> On Mar 02, 2016, at 09:56 AM, ilove zfs <ilove...@icloud.com> wrote: >> >> >We'd also appreciate opinions of "Please upstream even without >> mirror/RAID-Z support" or "Please don't integrate without mirror/RAID-Z >> support - all ZFS features should work together." >> >> I'd be concerned that this will lead a significant number of people to >> total people loss when they start dismantling mirror vdevs in order to be >> able to remove them, and then run without redundancy during the course of >> the removal. >> >> *openzfs-developer* | Archives >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/274414/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/274414/28017255-baca8bdb> | >> Modify >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> >> Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> >> > > ------------------------------------------- openzfs-developer Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/274414/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/274414/28015062-cce53afa Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=28015062&id_secret=28015062-f966d51c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
