On Aug 30, 2010, at 11:30 PM, Nikola M wrote: > What do you think it is the case, with unimportant data that is put on ZFS > rpool without protection?
How so? > What might be chances to also retrieve some of them in case of disk failure > (and in function of number of disks in rpool)? Are you suggesting a RAID 0 set with ZFS? > I was thinking of putting non importand data directly on ZFS rpool while > important ones are in raidzX/mirrored on same disks etc. Again, I'm not sure I understand the layout. Could you please elaborate? IMHO, RAID 0 should never be used unless it's part of a 0+1 set. Otherwise, be prepared to increase your chances of data loss with each drive you add. However, this is fine if you're using it for for virtual mem and other temp fs or db situations where you need a large amount of scratch space. It might be worth thoroughly reading the wikipedia entry on RAID as it does a good job of explaining the theory and practice of most of these concepts, their strengths & weaknesses, etc. -Gary _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/discuss
