On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 10:34 +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: > Am Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 04:46:12AM +0100 schrieb hw: > > On Wed, 2022-11-09 at 18:26 +0100, Christoph Brinkhaus wrote: > > > Am Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 06:11:34PM +0100 schrieb hw: > > > [...] > [...] > > > > > > > Why would partitions be better than the block device itself? They're like > > an > > additional layer and what could be faster and easier than directly using the > > block devices? > > Using the block device is no issue until you have a mirror or so. > In case of a mirror ZFS will use the capacity of the smallest drive.
But you can't make partitions larger than the drive. > I have read that a for example 100GB disk might be slightly larger > then 100GB. When you want to replace a 100GB disk with a spare one > which is less larger than the original one the pool will not fit on > the disk and the replacement fails. Ah yes, right! I kinda did that a while ago for spinning disks that might be replaced by SSDs eventually and wanted to make sure that the SSDs wouldn't be too small. I forgot about that, my memory really isn't what it used to be ... > With partitions you can specify the space. It does not hurt if there > are a few MB unallocated. But then the partitions of the diks have > exactly the same size. yeah