On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 9:22 AM, David Collier-Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We've discussed this in considerable detail, but the original > question remains unanswered: if an organization *must* use > multiple pools, is there an upper bound to avoid or a rate > of degradation to be considered?
I have a keen interest in this as well. I would really like zones to be able to independently fail over between hosts in a zone farm. The work coming out of the Indiana, IPS, Caiman, etc. projects imply that zones will have to be on zfs. In order to fail zones over between systems independently either I need to have a zpool per zone or I need to have per-dataset replication. Considering that with some workloads 20+ zones on a T2000 is quite feasible, a T5240 could be pushing 80+ zones and as such a relatively large number of zpools. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
