----- Original Message ----- > On Jun 21, 2010, at 05:00, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: > > > So far the plan is to keep it in one pool for design and > > administration simplicity. Why would you want to split up (net) 40TB > > into more pools? Seems to me that'll mess up things a bit, having to > > split up SSDs for use on different pools, loosing the flexibility of > > a common pool etc. Why? > > If different groups or areas have different I/O characteristics for > one. If in one case (users) you want responsiveness, you could go with > striped-mirrors. However, if departments have lots of data, it may be > worthwhile to put it on a RAID-Z pool for better storage efficiency.
We have considered RAID-1+0 and concluded with no current needs for this, as of now. Close to 1TB SSD cache will also help to boost read speeds, so I think it will be sufficient, at least for now. About different I/O characteristics in different groups/areas, this is not something we have data on for now. Do you know a good way to check this? The data is located on two different zpools (sol10) today. Vennlige hilsener / Best regards roy -- Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk (+47) 97542685 r...@karlsbakk.net http://blogg.karlsbakk.net/ -- I all pedagogikk er det essensielt at pensum presenteres intelligibelt. Det er et elementært imperativ for alle pedagoger å unngå eksessiv anvendelse av idiomer med fremmed opprinnelse. I de fleste tilfeller eksisterer adekvate og relevante synonymer på norsk. _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
