> -I'm under the impression that ZFS+(ZFS2) is similar > to RAID6, so for the initial 8x500GB two drives would > be sucked into parity so I'd have a 3TB volume with > the ability to lose two discs, no?
"RAIDZ2" is the term you're looking for; and yes, you'd wind up with 3 TB of usable space. > -I can't add discs to the RAIDz volume so in the > future for the 4x750 I'd just do a new RAIDz on them > (one disc is for parity) and add it to the ZFS > group. Hmmm. That's not a good idea, because you'll lose the ability to lose [any] two disks and survive. If you wanted to pool all of the disks, and you plan to use RAIDZ on one group of disks, you might as well use RAIDZ on both, IMO. > -If I do that it won't write data across both RAID > volumes will it? Yes, if you add them both to the same zpool. > -If I want more control over what files go on which > array should I keep them as distinct volumes? Yes. You should create two zpools, one for each array. Filesystems are tied to a single pool, so at that point you have full control (at the filesystem level) of which files go on which array. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
