Hmm...it might be completely wrong , but the idea of raidz2 vdev with 3 disks came from the reading of http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/gcvjg?a=view .
This particular page has the following example :
*zpool create tank raidz2 c1t0d0 c2t0d0 c3t0d0*
# *zpool status -v tank*
pool: tank
state: ONLINE
scrub: none requested
config:
NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM
tank ONLINE 0 0 0
raidz2 ONLINE 0 0 0
c1t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c2t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
c3t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0
So...what am i missing here? Just a bad example in the sun documentation
regarding zfs?
Bruno
On 25-3-2010 20:10, Freddie Cash wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Bruno Sousa <bso...@epinfante.com
> <mailto:bso...@epinfante.com>> wrote:
>
> What do you mean by "Using fewer than 4 disks in a raidz2 defeats
> the purpose of raidz2, as you will always be in a degraded mode" ?
> Does it means that having 2 vdevs with 3 disks it won't be
> redundant in the advent of a drive failure?
>
>
> raidz1 is similar to raid5 in that it is single-parity, and requires a
> minimum of 3 drives (2 data + 1 parity)
> raidz2 is similar to raid6 in that it is double-parity, and requires a
> minimum of 4 drives (2 data + 2 parity)
>
> IOW, a raidz2 vdev made up of 3 drives will always be running in
> degraded mode (it's missing a drive).
>
> --
> Freddie Cash
> fjwc...@gmail.com <mailto:fjwc...@gmail.com>
>
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by *MailScanner* <http://www.mailscanner.info/>, and is
> believed to be clean.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zfs-discuss mailing list
> zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
