Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz capacity osol vs freebsd
When viewing a raidz|raidz1|raidz2 pool, 'zpool list|status' will report the total "device" space; ie: 3 1TB drives in a raidz will show approx. 3TB space. 'zfs list' will show available FILESYSTEM space, ie: 3 1TB raidz disks, approx 2TB space. Logic wrote: > Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote: >> On 07/18/10 11:19 AM, marco wrote: >>> *snip* >>> >>> >> Yes, that is correct. zfs list reports usable space, which is 2 out of >> the three drives (parity isn't confined to one device). >> >>> *snip* >>> >>> >> Are you sure? That result looks odd. It is what I'd expect to see from >> a stripe, rather than a raidz. >> >> What does "zpool iostat -v pool2" report? > > Hi Ian, > > I'm the friend with the osol release(snv_117) installed. > > The output you asked for is: > % zpool iostat -v pool2 > capacity operationsbandwidth > pool used avail read write read write > -- - - - - - - > pool2 4.26T 1.20T208 78 22.1M 409K > raidz1 4.26T 1.20T208 78 22.1M 409K > c2d1- - 81 37 7.97M 208K > c1d0- - 82 38 7.85M 209K > c2d0- - 79 37 7.79M 209K > -- - - - - - - > > It really is a raidz, created a long time ago with build 27a, and I have been > replacing the disks ever since, by removing one disk at a time and waiting for > the > resilvering to be done. > > greets Leon > ___ > zfs-discuss mailing list > zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss > +-+ ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz capacity osol vs freebsd
Ian Collins (i...@ianshome.com) wrote: > On 07/18/10 11:19 AM, marco wrote: >> *snip* >> >> > Yes, that is correct. zfs list reports usable space, which is 2 out of > the three drives (parity isn't confined to one device). > >> *snip* >> >> > Are you sure? That result looks odd. It is what I'd expect to see from > a stripe, rather than a raidz. > > What does "zpool iostat -v pool2" report? Hi Ian, I'm the friend with the osol release(snv_117) installed. The output you asked for is: % zpool iostat -v pool2 capacity operationsbandwidth pool used avail read write read write -- - - - - - - pool2 4.26T 1.20T208 78 22.1M 409K raidz1 4.26T 1.20T208 78 22.1M 409K c2d1- - 81 37 7.97M 208K c1d0- - 82 38 7.85M 209K c2d0- - 79 37 7.79M 209K -- - - - - - - It really is a raidz, created a long time ago with build 27a, and I have been replacing the disks ever since, by removing one disk at a time and waiting for the resilvering to be done. greets Leon pgpzboat6m99x.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
Re: [zfs-discuss] raidz capacity osol vs freebsd
On 07/18/10 11:19 AM, marco wrote: Im seeing weird differences between 2 raidz pools, 1 created on a recent freebsd 9.0-CURRENT amd64 box containing the zfs v15 bits, the other on a old osol build. The raidz pool on the fbsd box is created from 3 2Tb sata drives. The raidz pool on the osol box was created in the past from 3 smaller drives but all 3 drives have been replaced by 2Tb sata drives as well (using the autoexpand property). The weird difference that I don't understand is that 'zfs list' on both systems is reporting very different available space. FreeBSD raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool1 pool: pool1 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool1 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada2 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada3 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada4 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Since this is a new pool it automatically has been created as a version 15 pool % zpool get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 15 default % zfs get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 4 - % zpool list pool1 NAMESIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool1 5.44T 147K 5.44T 0% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool1 NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool1 91.9K 3.56T 28.0K /pool1<-- is this behavior correct, that 1 of the 3 sata drives is then only used as a single parity disk and therefor not being added to the actual total available space ? Yes, that is correct. zfs list reports usable space, which is 2 out of the three drives (parity isn't confined to one device). now we switch to the osol built raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool2 pool: pool2 NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool2 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 % zpool get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 14 local % zfs get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 1 - % zpool list pool2 NAMESIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool2 5.46T 4.61T 870G84% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool2 NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool2 3.32T 2.06T 3.18T /export/pool2<-- clearly different reported AVAILABLE space on the osol box (3.32T + 2.06T = 5.38T which seems correct taking overhead into account so it should be a little less than what 'zpool list' is reporting as available space. No compression is being used on either of the raidz pools. Are you sure? That result looks odd. It is what I'd expect to see from a stripe, rather than a raidz. What does "zpool iostat -v pool2" report? -- Ian. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
[zfs-discuss] raidz capacity osol vs freebsd
Im seeing weird differences between 2 raidz pools, 1 created on a recent freebsd 9.0-CURRENT amd64 box containing the zfs v15 bits, the other on a old osol build. The raidz pool on the fbsd box is created from 3 2Tb sata drives. The raidz pool on the osol box was created in the past from 3 smaller drives but all 3 drives have been replaced by 2Tb sata drives as well (using the autoexpand property). The weird difference that I don't understand is that 'zfs list' on both systems is reporting very different available space. FreeBSD raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool1 pool: pool1 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool1 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada2 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada3 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada4 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Since this is a new pool it automatically has been created as a version 15 pool % zpool get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 15 default % zfs get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 4 - % zpool list pool1 NAMESIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool1 5.44T 147K 5.44T 0% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool1 NAMEUSED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool1 91.9K 3.56T 28.0K /pool1 <-- is this behavior correct, that 1 of the 3 sata drives is then only used as a single parity disk and therefor not being added to the actual total available space ? now we switch to the osol built raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool2 pool: pool2 NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool2 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 % zpool get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 14 local % zfs get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 1 - % zpool list pool2 NAMESIZE USED AVAILCAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool2 5.46T 4.61T 870G84% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool2 NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool2 3.32T 2.06T 3.18T /export/pool2 <-- clearly different reported AVAILABLE space on the osol box (3.32T + 2.06T = 5.38T which seems correct taking overhead into account so it should be a little less than what 'zpool list' is reporting as available space. No compression is being used on either of the raidz pools. Hope someone can shed some light on this. marco -- Use UNIX or Die. ___ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
