Random thoughts:
If we were to use some intelligence in the design, we could perhaps have
a monitor that profiles the workload on the system (a pool, for example)
over a [week|month|whatever] and selects a point in time, based on
history, that it would expect the disks to be quite, and can 'pre-build'
the spare with the contents of the disk it's about to swap out. At the
point of switch-over, it could be pretty much instantaneous... It could
also bail if it happened that the system actually started to get
genuinely busy...
That might actually be quite cool, though, if all disks are rotated, we
end up with a whole bunch of disks that are evenly worn out again, which
is just what we are really trying to avoid! ;)
Nathan.
Wee Yeh Tan wrote:
On 1/30/07, David Magda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What about a rotating spare?
When setting up a pool a lot of people would (say) balance things
around buses and controllers to minimize single points of failure,
and a rotating spare could disrupt this organization, but would it be
useful at all?
The costs involved in "rotating" spares in terms of IOPS reduction may
not be worth it.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
