[zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups

2010-10-28 Thread Rob Cohen
I have a couple drive enclosures:
15x 450gb 15krpm SAS
15x 600gb 15krpm SAS

I'd like to set them up like RAID10.  Previously, I was using two hardware 
RAID10 volumes, with the 15th drive as a hot spare, in each enclosure.

Using ZFS, it could be nice to make them a single volume, so that I could share 
L2ARC and ZIL devices, rather than buy two sets.

It appears possible to set up 7x450gb mirrored sets and 7x600gb mirrored sets 
in the same volume, without losing capacity.  Is that a bad idea?  Is there a 
problem with having different stripe sizes, like this?

Thanks,
Rob
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups

2010-10-28 Thread Ian Collins

On 10/29/10 09:40 AM, Rob Cohen wrote:

I have a couple drive enclosures:
15x 450gb 15krpm SAS
15x 600gb 15krpm SAS

I'd like to set them up like RAID10.  Previously, I was using two hardware 
RAID10 volumes, with the 15th drive as a hot spare, in each enclosure.

Using ZFS, it could be nice to make them a single volume, so that I could share 
L2ARC and ZIL devices, rather than buy two sets.

It appears possible to set up 7x450gb mirrored sets and 7x600gb mirrored sets 
in the same volume, without losing capacity.  Is that a bad idea?  Is there a 
problem with having different stripe sizes, like this?

   
The problem would be one of performance once the pool becomes more than 
75% full.  At this point the smaller vedevs may be full and all new 
write activity will be restricted to the bigger devices.


--
Ian.

___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups

2010-10-28 Thread Rob Cohen
Thanks, Ian.

If I understand correctly, the performance would then drop to the same level as 
if I set them up as separate volumes in the first place.

So, I get double the performance for 75% of my data, and equal performance for 
25% of my data, and my L2ARC will adapt to my working set across both 
enclosures.

That sounds like all upside, and no downside, unless I'm missing something.

Are there any other problems?
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss


Re: [zfs-discuss] stripes of different size mirror groups

2010-10-28 Thread Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
 If I understand correctly, the performance would then drop to the same
 level as if I set them up as separate volumes in the first place.
 
 So, I get double the performance for 75% of my data, and equal
 performance for 25% of my data, and my L2ARC will adapt to my working
 set across both enclosures.
 
 That sounds like all upside, and no downside, unless I'm missing
 something.
 
 Are there any other problems?

Not really. You also have the option to replace the smaller drives with bigger 
ones, one by one, if you set autogrow=on on that pool.

Vennlige hilsener / Best regards

roy
--
Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk
(+47) 97542685
r...@karlsbakk.net
http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/
--
I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er 
et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av 
idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og 
relevante synonymer på norsk.
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss