On Wed, September 16, 2009 10:35, cindy.swearin...@sun.com wrote: > Detaching disks from a mirror isn't ideal but if you absolutely have > to reuse a disk temporarily then go with mirrors. See the output below. > You can replace disks in either configuration if you want to switch > smaller disks with larger disks, for example.
In a small configuration, like a home NAS, like I'm running, the upgrade issue was what drove me to mirrors over RAIDZ, despite the cost. A typical configuration would have 4 or 5 hot-swap bays. I have 8, though only interfaces for 6 of them, and two are used for boot disks in a mirror, so my data pool is in fact 4 drives. It was cheaper to start with a two-disk mirror, knowing that I could add a second two-disk mirror when needed, than it would have been to invest in 4 disks right away. And (after filling all the slots) it's cheaper to upgrade the two disks in a mirror than the ~4 disks in a RAIDZ if I need more space. Despite my digital photography, and multiple housemates, I haven't filled the current 800gb usable space (two vdevs, each a two-disk mirror of 400GB drives). By the time I do, I will certainly be able to afford larger drives! -- David Dyer-Bennet, d...@dd-b.net; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
