On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 01:35:22PM -0600, Tim wrote: > > > Are you telling me zfs is deficient to the point it can't handle basic > > > right-sizing like a 15$ sata raid adapter? > > > > How do there $15 sata raid adapters solve the problem? The more details you > > could provide the better obviously. > > They short stroke the disk so that when you buy a new 500GB drive that isn't > the exact same number of blocks you aren't screwed. It's a design choice to > be both sane, and to make the end-users life easier. You know, sort of like > you not letting people choose their raid layout...
Drive vendors, it would seem, have an incentive to make their "500GB" drives as small as possible. Should ZFS then choose some amount of padding at the end of each device and chop it off as insurance against a slightly smaller drive? How much of the device should it chop off? Conversely, should users have the option to use the full extent of the drives they've paid for, say, if they're using a vendor that already provides that guarantee? > You know, sort of like you not letting people choose their raid layout... Yes, I'm not saying it shouldn't be done. I'm asking what the right answer might be. Adam -- Adam Leventhal, Fishworks http://blogs.sun.com/ahl _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
