> 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 need > to have the same block count to replace a device, which is why I asked for a > "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 drive > cache if you don't give it a complete disk so this approach incurs as significant > 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 firstname.lastname@example.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss