Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:04 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
The primary concern as I understand it is performance. If they're
close in size, it shouldn't be a big deal, but when you've got
mismatched rg's it can cause quite the performance troubleshooting
nightmare. It's the same reas
On Mar 1, 2010, at 4:04 PM, Tim Cook wrote:
The primary concern as I understand it is performance. If they're
close in size, it shouldn't be a big deal, but when you've got
mismatched rg's it can cause quite the performance troubleshooting
nightmare. It's the same reason you don't want to
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Eduardo Bragatto wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I just joined the list after finding an unanswered message from Ray Van
> Dolson in the archives.
>
> I'm reproducing his question here, as I'm wondering about the same issue
> and did not find an answer for it anywhere ye
Hi everyone,
I just joined the list after finding an unanswered message from Ray
Van Dolson in the archives.
I'm reproducing his question here, as I'm wondering about the same
issue and did not find an answer for it anywhere yet.
Can anyone shed any light on this subject?
-- Original Mes
What are the technical reasons to not have mismatched replication
levels?
For example, I am creating a zpool with three raidz vdevs. Two with 8
disks and one with only 7. zpool allows me to do this with -f of
course, but I can't find much documentation on why I shouldn't other
than it's not reco
