On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Peter Tripp <petertr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. > My understanding of things is along the lines of: A raidz1 vdev writes out data along with 1 parity block. A raidz2 vdev writes out data along with 2 parity blocks. A degraded raidz2 offers the same redundancy level as a healthy raidz1, but it still writes out (or at least calculates) 2 parity blocks. Thus, the degraded raidz2 vdev does more work than a healthy raidz1, even though they both provide the same level of redundancy. -- Freddie Cash fjwc...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
