Diskspace may be lost on redundacy, but there's still two or more devices in the mirror. Read requests can be spread across these.
-- Via iPhone 3G On 11-août-08, at 11:07, Martin Svensson <[EMAIL PROTECTED] m> wrote: > I read this (http://blogs.sun.com/roch/entry/when_to_and_not_to) > blog regarding when and when not to use raidz. There is an example > of a plain striped configuration and a mirror configuration. (See > below) > > M refers to a 2-way mirror and S to a simple dynamic stripe. > > Config Blocks Available Random FS Blocks /sec > ------------ ---------------- --------- > M 2 x (50) 5000 GB 20000 > S 1 x (100) 10000 GB 20000 > > Granted, the simple striped configuration is fast, and of course > with no redundancy. But I don't understand how a mirrored > configuration can perform as good when you sacrifice half of your > disks for redundancy. Doesn't a mirror perform as one device? Can > someone please clarify the example from the above, I think I am > missing something? > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > _______________________________________________ > 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
