On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos<math...@eternamente.info> wrote: > > On Thu, July 9, 2009 09:25, Dan Naumov wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Nenhum_de_Nos<math...@eternamente.info> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, July 9, 2009 08:25, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: >>>> Hi, all, >>>> >>>> I just wanted to say a big big thank you to Kip and all the >>>> developers who made ZFS on FreeBSD real. >>>> >>>> And to everyone who provided helpful comments in the >>>> last couple of days. >>>> >>>> I had to delete and rebuild my zpool to switch from a >>>> 12-disk raidz2 to two 6-disk ones, but yesterday I could >>>> replace the raw devices with glabel devices and practice >>>> replacing a failed disk at the same time. ;-) >>>> >>>> So now we have this setup: >>>> >>>> NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM >>>> zfs ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk100 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk101 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk102 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk103 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk104 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk105 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk106 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk107 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk108 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk109 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk110 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> label/disk111 ONLINE 0 0 0 >>>> >>>> which will get another enclosure with 6 750-GB-disks, soon. >>>> >>>> I really like the way I can manage storage from the operating >>>> system without propriatary controller management software or >>>> even rebooting into the BIOS. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> Patrick >>> >>> I've always been curious about this. is said not good to have many disks >>> in one pool. ok then. but this layout you're using in here will have the >>> same effect as the twelve disks in only one pool ? (the space here is >>> the >>> sum of both pools ?) >> >> Having an enormous pool consisting of dozens of disks is not the >> actual problem. Having the pool consist of large (> 9 disks) >> raidz/raidz2 "groups" is. >> >> A single pool consising of 5 x 8 disk raidz (40 disks total) is fine. >> A single pool consisting of a 40 (or any amount bigger than 9) disk >> raidz is not. > > thanks. but the final file system in both these cases are the same ? (what > I'll see in df -h).
No. A single pool consisting of 5 x 8 disk raidz will have 40 disks total, 35 disks worth of space A single pool consisting of 5 x 8 disk raidz2 will have 40 disks total, 30 disks worth of space A single 40 disk raidz (DO NOT DO THIS) will have 40 disks total, 39 disks worth of space and will definately explode on you sooner rather than later (probably on the first import, export or scrub). - Sincerely, Dan Naumov _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"