hm, yes true...did not thought about that, thx ! On 2 December 2014 at 11:26, Kirk Kosinski <kirkkosin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, my instinct says it won't work, but there shouldn't be any harm in > trying. IIRC some settings like this have to be >= 1. However, the > storage disable thresholds seem more appropriate for this scenario. You > can set it at various levels (global, zone, cluster) depending on your > exact needs. > > Best regards, > Kirk > > On 12/02/2014 12:36 AM, Andrija Panic wrote: > > true... ZFS pool under NFS...will consider...but I;'m just wondering, > since > > it is math of available space = overprovisioningFactor x realspace - I > > guess this is technicaly possible... > > > > On 2 December 2014 at 09:34, Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > > > >> I think your approaching this from the wrong side. > >> Why not just nfs export half of the space instead? (you could use lvm, > >> thin-lvm etc)? > >> > >> Lucian > >> > >> -- > >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > >> > >> Nux! > >> www.nux.ro > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >>> From: "Andrija Panic" <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > >>> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org, d...@cloudstack.apache.org > >>> Sent: Tuesday, 2 December, 2014 07:53:37 > >>> Subject: NFS overprovisioning of 0.5 ??? > >> > >>> Hi. > >>> > >>> wondering if it is possible to set overprovisioning factor to less than > >> 1 ? > >>> > >>> I have 1 NFS box, 2 x 10GB cards inside, don't want to do bonding, but > >>> efectively present this single box as 2 boxes via 2 IP adresses - so in > >>> this scenario I need to set overprovisioning factor to less than 1, to > >> i.e. > >>> 0.5 - because of disk space etc... > >>> > >>> This is for test purposes, but again... > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Andrija Panić > >> > > > > > > > > -- Andrija Panić
