On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 04:08:28PM -0400, Zaphod Beeblebrox wrote: > On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Andrew Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > but what struck me as odd is the desire to create two separate zpools - one > > for data storage and one for the system. i think one of zfs's greatest > > strengths is the abstraction/separation between disks and filesystems. > > > There are a few reasons to consider more than one zpool. One is > performance. Another is the ability to boot from it (AFAIK, you can only > boot from mirror'd pools). The ZFS abstraction is cool --- but it's not > magic.
There is no ZFSboot support committed. You can only have root file system on ZFS and /boot/ on UFS. In this case you can put your root file system on any kind of pool. The reason for multiple pools is data importance. You may have a pool with no redundancy at all for unimportant data, then you can have another pool with RAIDZ2 for more important data and at the end mirrored pool on top of encrypted disks for secret data. -- Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.FreeBSD.org FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am!
pgpFJU77HUcnA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
