> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Peter Jeremy
> On 2012-Apr-14 02:30:54 +1000, Tim Cook <t...@cook.ms> wrote:
> >You will however have an issue replacing them if one should fail.  You
> to have the same block count to replace a device, which is why I asked for
> "right-sizing" years ago.
> The "traditional" approach this is to slice the disk yourself so you have
a slice
> size with a known area and a dummy slice of a couple of GB in case a
> replacement is a bit smaller.  Unfortunately, ZFS on Solaris disables the
> cache if you don't give it a complete disk so this approach incurs as
> performance overhead there.  

It's not so much that it "disables" it, as "doesn't enable" it.  By default,
for anything, the write back cache (on-disk) would be disabled, but if
you're using the whole disk for ZFS, then ZFS enables it, because it's known
to be safe.  (Unless... nevermind.)

Whenever I've deployed ZFS on partitions, I just script the enabling of the
writeback.  So Peter's message is true, but it's solvable.

zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to