Chris Cosby gmail.com> writes:
>
>
> You're backing up 40TB+ of data, increasing at 20-25% per year.
> That's insane.
Over time, backing up his data will require _fewer_ and fewer disks.
Disk sizes increase by about 40% every year.
-marc
___
zfs-dis
Chris Cosby wrote:
>I'm going down a bit of a different path with my reply here. I know that all
>shops and their need for data are different, but hear me out.
>
>1) You're backing up 40TB+ of data, increasing at 20-25% per year. That's
>insane. Perhaps it's time to look at your backup strategy no
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Richard Elling wrote:
>
> nit: SATA disks are single port, so you would need a SAS
> implementation to get multipathing to the disks. This will not
> significantly impact the overall availability of the data, however.
> I did an availability analysis of thumper to show this.
Miles Nordin wrote:
>> "djm" == Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "bf" == Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>
>djm> Why are you planning on using RAIDZ-2 rather than mirroring ?
>
> isn't MTDL sometimes shorter for mirroring than raidz2? I thi
[Richard Elling] wrote:
> Don Enrique wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am looking for some best practice advice on a project that i am working on.
>>
>> We are looking at migrating ~40TB backup data to ZFS, with an annual data
>> growth of
>> 20-25%.
>>
>> Now, my initial plan was to create one large pool co
> "djm" == Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "bf" == Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
djm> Why are you planning on using RAIDZ-2 rather than mirroring ?
isn't MTDL sometimes shorter for mirroring than raidz2? I think that
is the biggest point of raidz2, is it no
Don Enrique wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am looking for some best practice advice on a project that i am working on.
>
> We are looking at migrating ~40TB backup data to ZFS, with an annual data
> growth of
> 20-25%.
>
> Now, my initial plan was to create one large pool comprised of X RAIDZ-2
> vdevs ( 7 +
I'm going down a bit of a different path with my reply here. I know that all
shops and their need for data are different, but hear me out.
1) You're backing up 40TB+ of data, increasing at 20-25% per year. That's
insane. Perhaps it's time to look at your backup strategy no from a hardware
perspect
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008, Don Enrique wrote:
>
> This means that i potentially could loose 40TB+ of data if three
> disks within the same RAIDZ-2 vdev should die before the resilvering
> of at least one disk is complete. Since most disks will be filled i
> do expect rather long resilvering times.
Yes
> Don Enrique wrote:
> > Now, my initial plan was to create one large pool
> comprised of X RAIDZ-2 vdevs ( 7 + 2 )
> > with one hotspare per 10 drives and just continue
> to expand that pool as needed.
> >
> > Between calculating the MTTDL and performance
> models i was hit by a rather scary thou
Don Enrique wrote:
> Now, my initial plan was to create one large pool comprised of X RAIDZ-2
> vdevs ( 7 + 2 )
> with one hotspare per 10 drives and just continue to expand that pool as
> needed.
>
> Between calculating the MTTDL and performance models i was hit by a rather
> scary thought.
>
Hi,
I am looking for some best practice advice on a project that i am working on.
We are looking at migrating ~40TB backup data to ZFS, with an annual data
growth of
20-25%.
Now, my initial plan was to create one large pool comprised of X RAIDZ-2 vdevs
( 7 + 2 )
with one hotspare per 10 drives
12 matches
Mail list logo
