On Mon, Jul 09, 2007 at 03:57:30PM -0400, Kent Watsen wrote: > > > (4+1)*2 is 2x faster, and in theory is less likely to have wasted space > > in transaction group (unlikely seen) > > (4+1)*2 is cheaper to upgrade in place because of its fewer elements > I'm aware of these benefits but I feel that having one large lun is > easier to manage - in that I can allocate the entrire array's storage > arbitrarily... I fear that if I split the array in half, I might end up > with not enough space on one side and too much on the other. > Otherwise, I'd do this in a heartbeat...
Don't confuse vdevs with pools. If you add two 4+1 vdevs to a single pool it still appears to be "one place to put things". ;) -brian -- "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
