Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:44:09 +0300
From:      Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com>
To:        Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ZFS - thanks
Message-ID:  <cf9b1ee00907110144g3c9bfc5dn911df4a15167e537@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090711084042.GA77702@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
References:  <20090709112512.GA44158@hugo10.ka.punkt.de> <73a41d4b72d62b0bfe3d0fb7206376a8.squirrel@cygnus.homeunix.com> <cf9b1ee00907090525t7a337775q71aa01e6a3173de5@mail.gmail.com> <84665df87e93a6ccf24d9837cbc53eba.squirrel@cygnus.homeunix.com> <cf9b1ee00907090539i70bf97eq32fe0aa960e9dc52@mail.gmail.com> <20090711084042.GA77702@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Peter
Jeremy<peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> wrote:
> On 2009-Jul-09 15:39:35 +0300, Dan Naumov <dan.naumov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>A single 40 disk raidz (DO NOT DO THIS) will have 40 disks total, 39
>>disks worth of space and will definately explode on you sooner rather
>>than later (probably on the first import, export or scrub).
>
> Can you provide a reference for this statement. =A0AFAIK, the only
> reason for the upper recommended limit of 9 disks is performance.
>
> --
> Peter Jeremy

Searching the different FreeBSD mailing lists (which have had
discussions about such cases) and googling should yield results.

- Sincerely,
Dan Naumov



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cf9b1ee00907110144g3c9bfc5dn911df4a15167e537>