Kyle McDonald wrote:
Richard Elling wrote:
On Jul 23, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Kyle McDonald wrote:
Richard Elling wrote:
On Jul 23, 2009, at 7:28 AM, Kyle McDonald wrote:
F. Wessels wrote:
Thanks posting this solution.
But I would like to point out that bug 6574286 "removing a slog
doesn't work" still isn't resolved. A solution is under it's way,
according to George Wilson. But in the mean time, IF something
happens you might be in a lot of trouble. Even without some
unfortunate incident you cannot for example export your data
pool, pull the drives and leave the root pool.
In my case the slog slice wouldn't be the slog for the root pool,
it would be the slog for a second data pool.
If the device went bad, I'd have to replace it, true. But if the
device goes bad, then so did a good part of my root pool, and I'd
have to replace that too.
Mirror the slog to match your mirrored root pool.
Yep. That was the plan. I was just explaining that not being able to
remove the slog wasn't an issue for me since I planned on always
having that device available.
I was more curious about whether there were any diown sides to
sharing the SSD between the root pool and the slog?
I think it is a great idea, assuming the SSD has good write performance.
This one claims up to 230MB/s read and 180MB/s write and it's only $196.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820609393
Compared to this one (250MB/s read and 170MB/s write) which is $699.
Oops. Forgot the link:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820167014
Are those claims really trustworthy? They sound too good to be true!
-Kyle
-- richard
_______________________________________________
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
