Caveat: do not enable nonvolatile write cache for UFS.
Correction: do not enable *volatile* write cache for UFS :-)
--
Dan.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
To expand on this:
The recommended use of whole disks is for drives with volatile write caches
where ZFS will enable the cache if it owns the whole disk.
Does ZFS really never use disk cache when working with a disk slice? Is there
any way to force it to use the disk cache?
This message
MC wrote:
To expand on this:
The recommended use of whole disks is for drives with volatile
write caches where ZFS will enable the cache if it owns the whole disk.
Does ZFS really never use disk cache when working with a disk slice?
This question doesn't make sense. ZFS doesn't know
This is a problem for replacement, not creation.
You're talking about solving the problem in the future? I'm talking about
working around the problem today. :) This isn't a fluffy dream problem. I
ran into this last month when an RMA'd drive wouldn't fit back into a RAID5
array. RAIDZ is
MC wrote:
This is a problem for replacement, not creation.
You're talking about solving the problem in the future? I'm talking about
working around the problem today. :) This isn't a fluffy dream problem. I
ran into this last month when an RMA'd drive wouldn't fit back into a RAID5
The situation: a three 500gb disk raidz array. One disk breaks and you replace
it with a new one. But the new 500gb disk is slightly smaller than the
smallest disk in the array.
I presume the disk would not be accepted into the array because the zpool
replace entry on the zpool man page
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
The situation: a three 500gb disk raidz array. One disk breaks and you
replace it with a new one. But the new 500gb disk is slightly smaller than
the smallest disk in the array.
. . .
So I figure the only way to build smaller-than-max-disk-size functionality
into
MC wrote:
The situation: a three 500gb disk raidz array. One disk breaks and you
replace it with a new one. But the new 500gb disk is slightly smaller
than the smallest disk in the array.
This is quite a problem for RAID arrays, too. It is why vendors use custom
labels for disks. When
Thanks for the comprehensive replies!
I'll need some baby speak on this one though:
The recommended use of whole disks is for drives with volatile write caches
where ZFS will enable the cache if it owns the whole disk. There may be an
RFE lurking here, but it might be tricky to correctly
