----- "Peter Tripp" <petertr...@gmail.com> skrev: > Can someone with a stronger understanding of ZFS tell me why a > degraded RaidZ2 (minus one disk) is less efficient than RaidZ1? > (Besides the fact that your pools are always reported as degraded.) I > guess the same would apply with RaidZ2 vs RaidZ3 - 1disk.
A degraded raidz2 (minus one disk) will offer the same redundancy as raidz1 would, and the same numbers will apply to raidz3 vs raidz2. One of the good reasons of using raidz2 or even raidz3 is the chance of sector failure during the eventual resilver. Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
