On 18/10/2011 4:51 a.m., James Carlson wrote:
Gabriele Bulfon wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering what (if any) problems I may encounter by mixing different zfs
strategies on one pool,
with all equal disk sizes.
Examples:
- pool1: raidz1 a0 a1 a2 mirror a3 a4
- pool2: raidz1 b0 b1 b2 raidz1 b3 b4 b5 mirror b6 b7
- pool3: mirror c0 c1 mirror c2 c3 raidz c4 c5 c6
I'm just trying to balance pools performance and maximum space...
Last but not least:
- what if pool3 is actually the rpool (where system just occupies few GBytes),
where I'll add
volumes with quotas to share? Should I keep rpool separate absolutely?
(I just don't want to miss many GB on an rpool that will just stay as it is, on
the boot disks).
Last I checked, it wasn't possible to boot off of RAID-Z; only mirrors
were supported for boot. As for the other part, the man page says:
Virtual devices cannot be nested, so a mirror or raidz vir-
tual device can only contain files or disks. Mirrors of mir-
rors (or other combinations) are not allowed.
If you're looking to boost RAID-Z performance, I'd suggest adding more
disks. RAID-Z will effectively stripe the data across the available
devices, parallelizing the I/O operations. To get better error
tolerance, use raidz2 or raidz3.
zfs will also complain if your choices are likely to impact performance
e.g adding a 3 disk raidz to an existing 5 disk raidz.
Performance is optimal when build from the start, since data is evenly
spread across the available space.
Mark.
_______________________________________________
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
