RAIDZ = RAID5, so lose 1 drive (1.5TB) RAIDZ2 = RAID6, so lose 2 drives (3TB) RAIDZ3 = RAID7(?), so lose 3 drives (4.5TB).
What you lose in useable space, you gain in redundancy. -m -----Original Message----- From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Slack-Moehrle Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 12:04 PM To: Tim Cook Cc: zfs-discuss Subject: Re: [zfs-discuss] RAID10 >>So if I have 8 x 1.5tb drives, wouldn't I: >>- mirror drive 1 and 5 >>- mirror drive 2 and 6 >>- mirror drive 3 and 7 >>- mirror drive 4 and 8 >>Then stripe 1,2,3,4 >>Then stripe 5,6,7,8 >>How does one do this with ZFS? >So you would do: >zpool create tank mirror drive1 drive2 mirror drive3 drive4 mirror drive5 >drive6 mirror drive7 drive8 >See here: >http://www.stringliterals.com/?p=132 So, effectively mirroring the drives, but the pool that is created is one giant pool of all of the mirrors? I looked at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-standard_RAID_levels#RAID-Z and they had a brief description of RAIDZ2. Can someone explain in terms of usable space RAIDZ vs RAIDZ2 vs RAIDZ3? With 8 x 1.5tb? I apologize for seeming dense, I just am confused about non-stardard raid setups, they seem tricky. -Jason _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
