Im seeing weird differences between 2 raidz pools, 1 created on a recent freebsd 9.0-CURRENT amd64 box containing the zfs v15 bits, the other on a old osol build. The raidz pool on the fbsd box is created from 3 2Tb sata drives. The raidz pool on the osol box was created in the past from 3 smaller drives but all 3 drives have been replaced by 2Tb sata drives as well (using the autoexpand property).
The weird difference that I don't understand is that 'zfs list' on both systems is reporting very different available space. FreeBSD raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool1 pool: pool1 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool1 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada2 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada3 ONLINE 0 0 0 ada4 ONLINE 0 0 0 errors: No known data errors Since this is a new pool it automatically has been created as a version 15 pool % zpool get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 15 default % zfs get version pool1 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool1 version 4 - % zpool list pool1 NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool1 5.44T 147K 5.44T 0% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool1 NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool1 91.9K 3.56T 28.0K /pool1 <-- is this behavior correct, that 1 of the 3 sata drives is then only used as a single parity disk and therefor not being added to the actual total available space ? now we switch to the osol built raidz pool: % zpool status -v pool2 pool: pool2 NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM pool2 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 % zpool get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 14 local % zfs get version pool2 NAME PROPERTY VALUE SOURCE pool2 version 1 - % zpool list pool2 NAME SIZE USED AVAIL CAP HEALTH ALTROOT pool2 5.46T 4.61T 870G 84% ONLINE - % zfs list -r pool2 NAME USED AVAIL REFER MOUNTPOINT pool2 3.32T 2.06T 3.18T /export/pool2 <-- clearly different reported AVAILABLE space on the osol box (3.32T + 2.06T = 5.38T which seems correct taking overhead into account so it should be a little less than what 'zpool list' is reporting as available space. No compression is being used on either of the raidz pools. Hope someone can shed some light on this. marco -- Use UNIX or Die. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss