On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 1:30 PM, Bob Friesenhahn < bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us> wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Will Murnane wrote: > > Most drives are sold with two significant digits in the size: 320 GB, > > 400 GB, 640GB, 1.0 TB, etc. I don't see this changing any time > > particularly soon; unless someone starts selling a 1.25 TB drive or > > something, two digits will suffice. Even then, this formula would > > give you 96% (1.2/1.25) of the disk's capacity. > > If the drive is attached to a RAID controller which steals part of its > capacity for its own purposes, how will you handle that? > > These stated drive sizes are just marketing terms and do not have a > sound technical basis. Don't drive vendors provide actual sizing > information in their specification sheets so that knowledgeable > people can purchase the right sized drive? > > Bob > ====================================== > Bob Friesenhahn > bfrie...@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ > GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/ > You look at the size of the drive and you take a set percentage off... If it's a "LUN" and it's so far off it still can't be added with the percentage that works across the board for EVERYTHING ELSE, you change the size of the LUN at the storage array or adapter. I know it's fun to pretend this is rocket science and impossible, but the fact remains the rest of the industry has managed to make it work. I have a REAL tough time believing that Sun and/or zfs is so deficient it's an insurmountable obstacle for them. --Tim
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
