Generally, you choose your data pool config based on data size,
redundancy, and performance requirements. If those are all satisfied with
your single mirror, the only thing left for you to do is think about
splitting your data off onto a separate pool due to better performance
etc. (Because
On Mar 24, 2011, at 7:23 AM, Anonymous wrote:
Generally, you choose your data pool config based on data size,
redundancy, and performance requirements. If those are all satisfied with
your single mirror, the only thing left for you to do is think about
splitting your data off onto a
Right, put some small (30GB or something trivial) disks in for root and
then make a nice fast multi-spindle pool for your data. If your 320s
are around the same performance as your 500s, you could stripe and
mirror them all into a big pool. ZFS will waste the extra 180 on the
bigger disks
David Magda dma...@ee.ryerson.ca wrote:
On Mar 20, 2011, at 09:26, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The long term acceptance for ZFS depends on how Oracle will behave past the
announced Solaris 11 is released. If they don't Opensource the related ZFS,
they will harm the future of ZFS. If they
I'm curious where ZFS development is going.
I've been reading through the lists, and watching Oracle, Nexenta, Illumos, and
OpenIndiana for signs of life.
The feeling I get is that while there is plenty of userland work being done,
there is next to nothing on ZFS development outside of the
On Mar 25, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Chris Forgeron wrote:
I’m curious where ZFS development is going.
Forward :-)
I’ve been reading through the lists, and watching Oracle, Nexenta, Illumos,
and OpenIndiana for signs of life.
The feeling I get is that while there is plenty of userland work
