Dan Saul wrote:
I care more about data integrity then performance. Of course if
performance is so bad that one would not be able to, say stream a
video off of it that wouldn't be acceptable.
The model I used in this blog deals with small, random reads, not
streaming workloads. In part this is because the data needed to
calculate small, random read performance is readily available on disk
data sheets. For streaming workloads we can calculate the media
bandwidth, which will be good when you have multiple drives. But
there are other limitations in the system which will ultimately cap
the bandwidth, and those limitations are not expressed in data sheets.
The best way is to try it. Let us know how it works.
-- richard
On 6/22/07, Richard Elling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dan Saul wrote:
> Good day ZFS-Discuss,
>
> I am planning to build an array of 30 drives in a RaidZ2 configuration
> with two hot spares. However I read on the internet that this was not
> ideal.
>
> So I ask those who are more experianced then me, what configuration
> would you recommend with ZFS, I would like to have some redundancy but
> still keeping as much disk space open for my uses as possible.
>
> I don't want to mirror 15 drives to 15 drives as that would
> drastically affect my storage capacity.
There are hundreds of possible combinations of 30 drives.
It really comes down to a trade-off of space vs performance vs RAS.
http://blogs.sun.com/relling/entry/zfs_raid_recommendations_space_performance
-- richard
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
