On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 11:14:58AM -0400, Kent Watsen wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm new here and to ZFS but I've been lurking for quite some time... My
> question is simple: which is better 8+2 or 8+1+spare? Both follow the
> (N+P) N={2,4,8} P={1,2} rule, but 8+2 results in a total or 10 disks,
> which is one disk more than 3<=num-disks<=9 rule. But 8+2 has much
> better MTTDL than 8+1+spare and so I'm trying to understand how bad it
> would really be - what doesn't work/scale?
I think that the 3<=num-disks<=9 rule only applies to RAIDZ and it was
changed to 4<=num-disks<=10 for RAIDZ2, but I might be remembering wrong.
--
"Perl can be fast and elegant as much as J2EE can be fast and elegant.
In the hands of a skilled artisan, it can and does happen; it's just
that most of the shit out there is built by people who'd be better
suited to making sure that my burger is cooked thoroughly." -- Jonathan
Patschke
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
