Dear All, I'm sorry, I cannot provide verbose zpool information anymore. I was a bit in a hurry to put the file system into production and that's why I have reformatted the servers with ldiskfs.
On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 5:54 AM, Alexander I Kulyavtsev <a...@fnal.gov> wrote: > I was assuming the question was about total space as I struggled for some > time to understand why do I have 99 TB total available space per OSS, after > installing zfs lustre, while ldiskfs OSTs have 120 TB on the same hardware. > The 20% difference was partially (10%) accounted by different raid6 / raidz2 > configuration. But I was not able to explain the other 10%. > For question in original post, I can not make 24 TB from "available" field of > df output: > 207 KiB "available" on his zfs lustre, 198 KiB on ldiskfs lustre. > At the same time the difference of the total space is > 233548424256 -207693153280 = 25855270976 KiB = 24.09 TB. > Götz, could you please tell us what did you mean by "available" ? I was comparing the Lustre file system size from the two configurations, the space available for user data. I expected it to be the same, that is 218T for both file systems. I understand that you have the same issue. Regards, Götz Waschk _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org